AAOS2017: Similar 10-year PROMs and survivorship in CAS versus conventional TKA

Study Type: Randomized Trial
OE Level of Evidence: N/A
Journal Level of Evidence: N/A
CONFERENCE ACE REPORTS
This ACE Report is a summary of a conference presentation or abstract. The information provided has limited the ability to provide an accurate assessment of the risk of bias or the overall quality. Please interpret the results with caution as trials may be in progress and select results may have been presented.
Synopsis
80 patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty were randomized to the procedure with either the use of computer-assistance technology or to conventional methods. Patients were followed up for 10 years for results on clinical scores and survivorship. Results after 10 Please login to view the rest of this report. Please login to view the rest of this report.
Why was this study needed now?
Computer-assistance technology has been available in total knee arthroplasty for some time now, with many studies in support of better accuracy in component positioning. Nonetheless, many have pointed out that modest improvement in alignment may not correlate to a clinical advantage or longer survivorship, and in the absence of long-term data, suggestion regarding these outcomes has been mostly speculative. As long-term data is now starting to become available from early randomized controlled trials, there is pressing need to determine if clinical outcome or survivorship differs between computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty.
What was the principal research question?
In total knee arthroplasty, does the use of computer-assisted surgical technology significantly improve 10-year patient-reported outcome measures and survivorship when compared to conventional TKA?
Population: 80 patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty due to primary arthritis or osteonecrosis. All patients received the same cemented implant.
Intervention: CAS group: Patients underwent total knee arthroplasty with the use of an imageless computer navigation system.
Comparison: Conventional group: Patients underwent total knee arthroplasty with the use of conventional techniques and instruments.
Outcomes: Clinical scores included the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Forgotten Joint Score, the knee Society Score (KSS), and the Short-Form 12-Item General Health Survey (SF-12). Complications and survivorship were also recorded.
Methods: RCT
Time: Results were reported for follow-up at 10 years postoperatively.
What were the important findings?
CONTENT IS LOCKED
What should I remember most?
How will this affect the care of my patients?
The authors responsible for this critical appraisal and ACE Report indicate no potential conflicts of interest relating to the content in the original publication.