Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2024; 37(04): 303-309
DOI: 10.1055/a-2094-8822
Original Article

The Accuracy of a Portable Accelerometer-Based Navigation System for Tibial Alignment Can be Reliable during Total Knee Arthroplasty for Obese Patients

Kazumi Goto 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
,
Jinso Hirota
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
,
Yoshinari Miyamoto
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Center Hospital of the National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan
,
Yozo Katsuragawa
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

A portable accelerometer-based navigation system can be useful for achieving the target alignment. Tibial registration is based on the medial and lateral malleoli; however, the identification of landmarks may be difficult in obese (body mass index [BMI] >30 kg/m2) patients whose bones are not easily palpable from the body surface. This study compared tibial component alignment achieved using a portable accelerometer-based navigation system (Knee Align 2 [KA2]) in obese and control groups and aimed to validate the accuracy of bone cutting in obese patients. A total of 210 knees that underwent primary total knee arthroplasty using the KA2 system were included. After 1:3 propensity score matching, there were 32 and 96 knees in the BMI >30 group (group O) and BMI ≤30 group (group C), respectively. The absolute deviations of the tibial implant from the intended alignment were evaluated in the coronal plane (hip–knee–ankle [HKA] angle and medial proximal tibial angle) and sagittal plane (posterior tibial slope [PTS]). The inlier rate of each cohort, which was defined as tibial component alignment within 2 degrees of the intended alignment, was investigated. In the coronal plane, the absolute deviations of the HKA and MPTA from the intended alignment were 2.2 ± 1.8 degrees and 1.8 ± 1.5 degrees in group C and 1.7 ± 1.5 degrees and 1.7 ± 1.0 degrees in group O (p = 1.26, and p = 0.532). In the sagittal plane, the absolute deviations of the tibial implant were 1.6 ± 1.2 degrees in group C and 1.5 ± 1.1 degrees in group O (p = 0.570). The inlier rate was not significantly different between group C and group O (HKA: 64.6 vs. 71.9%, p = 0.521; MPTA: 67.7 vs. 78.1%, p = 0.372; PTS: 82.2 vs. 77.8%, p = 0.667). The accuracy of tibial bone cutting for the obese group was comparable to that of the control group. An accelerometer-based portable navigation system can be useful when attempting to achieve the target tibial alignment in obese patients.

Level of Evidence Level IV.

Keywords

portable accelerometer-based navigation system - Knee Align 2 - obesity - total knee arthroplasty


Publication History

Received: 26 September 2022

Accepted: 12 May 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
16 May 2023

Article published online:
19 June 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Villa JM, Pannu TS, Higuera-Rueda CA. What's new in adult reconstructive knee surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2022; 104 (02) 97-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 van der List JP, Chawla H, Joskowicz L, Pearle AD. Current state of computer navigation and robotics in unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (11) 3482-3495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Thienpont E, Schwab PE, Fennema P. Efficacy of patient-specific instruments in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (06) 521-530
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kim KK, Howell SM, Won YY. Kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty with patient-specific instrument. Yonsei Med J 2020; 61 (03) 201-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Seidenstein A, Birmingham M, Foran J, Ogden S. Better accuracy and reproducibility of a new robotically-assisted system for total knee arthroplasty compared to conventional instrumentation: a cadaveric study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021; 29 (03) 859-866
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Shah SM. After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?. Arthroplasty 2021; 3 (01) 41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Doan GW, Courtis RP, Wyss JG, Green EW, Clary CW. Image-free robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty improves implant alignment accuracy: a cadaveric study. J Arthroplasty 2022; 37 (04) 795-801
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sun H, Li S, Wang K, Wu G, Zhou J, Sun X. Efficacy of portable accelerometer-based navigation devices versus conventional guides in total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis. J Knee Surg 2020; 33 (07) 691-703
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Swamy AM, Malhotra R, Digge V, Manhas V, Gautam D, Srivastava DN. Accelerometer-based portable navigation, a faster guide compared to computer-assisted navigation in bilateral total knee arthroplasty—a randomized controlled study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31 (03) 786-792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Nam D, Weeks KD, Reinhardt KR, Nawabi DH, Cross MB, Mayman DJ. Accelerometer-based, portable navigation vs imageless, large-console computer-assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of radiographic results. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (02) 255-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Nam D, Cody EA, Nguyen JT, Figgie MP, Mayman DJ. Extramedullary guides versus portable, accelerometer-based navigation for tibial alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled trial: winner of the 2013 HAP PAUL award. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (02) 288-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Iorio R, Mazza D, Drogo P. et al. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of an accelerometer-based system for the tibial resection in total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2015; 39 (03) 461-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ikawa T, Takemura S, Kim M, Takaoka K, Minoda Y, Kadoya Y. Usefulness of an accelerometer-based portable navigation system in total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B (08) 1047-1052
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Bellemans J, Colyn W, Vandenneucker H, Victor J. The Chitranjan Ranawat award: is neutral mechanical alignment normal for all patients? The concept of constitutional varus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (01) 45-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Plancher KD, Shanmugam JP, Brite JE, Briggs KK, Petterson SC. Relevance of the tibial slope on functional outcomes in ACL-deficient and ACL intact fixed-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2021; 36 (09) 3123-3130
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gaillard R, Cerciello S, Lustig S, Servien E, Neyret P. Risk factors for tibial implant malpositioning in total knee arthrosplasty-consecutive series of one thousand, four hundred and seventeen cases. Int Orthop 2017; 41 (04) 749-756
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Lai YH, Cao J, Li ZX, Feng W, Xu H, Zhou ZK. Effect of body mass index on postoperative mechanical alignment and long-term outcomes after total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study of 671 knees. Ann Transl Med 2022; 10 (15) 829
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Berend ME, Ritter MA, Meding JB. et al. Tibial component failure mechanisms in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; ;(428): 26-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Tanaka Y, Nakamura S, Kuriyama S. et al. Medial tilting of the joint line in posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty increases contact force and stress. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2018; 53: 54-59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kerkhoffs GM, Servien E, Dunn W, Dahm D, Bramer JA, Haverkamp D. The influence of obesity on the complication rate and outcome of total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94 (20) 1839-1844
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Goto K, Katsuragawa Y, Miyamoto Y. Outcomes and component-positioning in total knee arthroplasty may be comparable between supervised trained surgeons and their supervisor. Knee Surg Relat Res 2020; 32 (01) 3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Dean RS, DePhillipo NN, Chahla J, Larson CM, LaPrade RF. Posterior tibial slope measurements using the anatomic axis are significantly increased compared with those that use the mechanical axis. Arthroscopy 2021; 37 (01) 243-249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Brouwer RW, Jakma TS, Brouwer KH, Verhaar JA. Pitfalls in determining knee alignment: a radiographic cadaver study. J Knee Surg 2007; 20 (03) 210-215
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Shetty GM, Mullaji AB, Bhayde S, Lingaraju AP. No effect of obesity on limb and component alignment after computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2014; 21 (04) 862-865
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Huang NF, Dowsey MM, Ee E, Stoney JD, Babazadeh S, Choong PF. Coronal alignment correlates with outcome after total knee arthroplasty: five-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (09) 1737-1741
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Bonner TJ, Eardley WG, Patterson P, Gregg PJ. The effect of post-operative mechanical axis alignment on the survival of primary total knee replacements after a follow-up of 15 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93 (09) 1217-1222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Schelker BL, Nowakowski AM, Hirschmann MT. What is the “safe zone” for transition of coronal alignment from systematic to a more personalised one in total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (02) 419-427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Parratte S, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ. Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92 (12) 2143-2149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Howell SM, Shelton TJ, Hull ML. Implant survival and function ten years after kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (12) 3678-3684
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Vanlommel L, Vanlommel J, Claes S, Bellemans J. Slight undercorrection following total knee arthroplasty results in superior clinical outcomes in varus knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (10) 2325-2330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Okamoto S, Mizu-uchi H, Okazaki K, Hamai S, Nakahara H, Iwamoto Y. Effect of tibial posterior slope on knee kinematics, quadriceps force, and patellofemoral contact force after posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (08) 1439-1443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Tsubosaka M, Kamenaga T, Kuroda Y. et al. Accelerometer-based portable navigation system is useful for tibial bone cutting in modified kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2021; 34 (08) 870-876
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar