Objectives : To determine the change in passive knee kinematics after Oxford Unicompartment Arthoplasty (UKA) (Biomet, Uk); and to compare the change in kinematics post-operatively between image guided and the normal surgical procedure.

Background: In anteromedial osteoarthritis, only the medial compartment of the knee is affected and the collateral ligaments as well as the cruciate mechanism are intact. These preconditions make the knee suitable for UKA. The operative technique of the Oxford UKA theoretically allows the surge on to replicate the natural kinematics of the knee, due to accurate ligament balancing and fully congruent meniscal bearing design of the prosthesis. Our hypothesis was that no difference in tibiofemoral kinematics is observed after UKA. In addition we also hypothesised that the results of the image guided surgery would be the same as the normal surgical procedure.

Design/Methods: To test this hypothesis, we conducted a study using 13 normal human cadaveric knees. For kinematic analysis, the Surgetics TM surgical navigation system (Praxim, France), equipped with custom written tracking software, was used. Reference markers were mounted to the proximal tibia and the distal femur. In a standardized set-up, the knee was positioned in a leg holder and preoperative kinematics of the normal knee was recorded after a para-patellar mini-incision (70–90 mm). Joint kinematics were recorded during passive knee flexion and plotted against flexion angle. Oxford UKA was performed; the standard Phase III instrumentation was used for six knees and the image guided procedure was used for seven knees. The main difference between the standard and image guided procedures was that the inter-medullary rod was not used for the image guided surgery. After the operation postoperative kinematics were recorded using the same measurement protocol. All data were processed using Matlab 6.1 analysis software (The Math Works Inc., MA, USA). Preoperative and postoperative tibiofemoral kinematics were determined and compared. The mechanical axes of the tibia and femur were determined and kinematics represented as functions of knee flexion range. Over both the flexing and extending cycles of the knee the changes in tibiofemoral rotation (& #916;ROT), tibiofemoral ab/adduction (& #916;ABD), and distances between the origins of the mechanical axes (& #916;X, & #916;Y, & #916;Z) were calculated between pre and post-operative states.

Design/Methods: To test this hypothesis, we conducted a study using 13 normal human cadaveric knees. For kinematic analysis, the Surgetics TM surgical navigation system (Praxim, France), equipped with custom written tracking software, was used. Reference markers were mounted to the proximal tibia and the distal femur. In a standardized set-up, the knee was positioned in a leg holder and preoperative kinematics of the normal knee was recorded after a para-patellar mini-incision (70–90 mm). Joint kinematics were recorded during passive knee flexion and plotted against flexion angle. Oxford UKA was performed; the standard Phase III instrumentation was used for six knees and the image guided procedure was used for seven knees. The main difference between the standard and image guided procedures was that the inter-medullary rod was not used for the image guided surgery. After the operation postoperative kinematics were recorded using the same measurement protocol. All data were processed using Matlab 6.1 analysis software (The Math Works Inc., MA, USA). Preoperative and postoperative tibiofemoral kinematics were determined and compared. The mechanical axes of the tibia and femur were determined and kinematics represented as functions of knee flexion range. Over both the flexing and extending cycles of the knee the changes in tibiofemoral rotation (& #916;ROT), tibiofemoral ab/adduction (& #916;ABD), and distances between the origins of the mechanical axes (& #916;X, & #916;Y, & #916;Z) were calculated between pre and post-operative states.

Conclusions: The image guidance system used in our study is a valuable tool for assessing pre- and postoperative knee kinematics. Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with the Phase III instrumentation in the presence of the cruciate mechanism reproduces the normal kinematics of the knee very accurately. The image guided procedure, performed without the inter-medullary rod, produced similar results to the standard surgery. Image guidance has a great potential for the assessment of pre- and post-replacement kinematics of the knee joint during surgery.

Introduction: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) presents challenges in achieving alignment for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Aim: Development and assessment of an image guidance system for MIS implanted Oxford UKA.

Methods: The Surgetics platform which uses intra-operative data acquisition was chosen as the base system. Software was developed to determine height of tibial cut, image guidance of saws, alignment of components and assessment of ligament tension. The accuracy of component placement was assessed in vitro using matched pairs of knees randomised into navigated (NAV n=10) and standard manual (MAN n=10) procedures; standardised postoperative A-P and lateral radiographs were used. Pre and post-operative kinematics were assessed (NAV n=6, MAN n=7). The changes postoperatively over knee flexion and extension were calculated for tibiofemoral rotation (ΔROT) and ab/adduction (ΔABD).

Results: Accurate component placement was achieved with both methods without significant differences. Tibial cut height was more accurately in the NAV group (re-cut rate: NAV 33%, MAN 50%). NAV femoral component placement was as accurate as MAN with intramedullary rod. For the flexing cycle mean ΔROT was −0.06° (range 6.08° to −3.93°) and mean ΔABD was −0.04° (range 3.39° to −5.72°). There were no observable differences between the NAV and MAN kinematics. Overall, no observable differences were found between pre and post-operative kinematics.

Conclusions: Image guidance produces accurate placement through MIS approach and reduces the amount of tibial bone resection.

Background: In anteromedial osteoarthritis, only the medial compartment of the knee is affected and the collateral ligaments as well as the cruciate mechanism are intact. These preconditions make the knee suitable for UKA. Our hypothesis was that no difference in tibiofemoral kinematics is observed after UKA. In addition we also hypothesised that the results of the image guided surgery would be the same as the normal surgical procedure.

Design/Methods: To test this hypothesis, we conducted a study using 13 normal human cadaveric knees. For kinematic analysis, the SurgeticsTM surgical navigation system (Praxim, France), equipped with custom written tracking software, was used. Reference markers were mounted to the proximal tibia and the distal femur. In a standardised set-up, the knee was positioned in a leg holder and preoperative kinematics of the normal knee was recorded after a para-patellar mini-incision . Joint kinematics were recorded during passive knee flexion and plotted against flexion angle. Oxford UKA was performed; the standard Phase III instrumentation was used for six knees and the image guided procedure was used for seven knees. After the operation postoperative kinematics were recorded using the same measurement protocol. All data were processed using Matlab 6.1 analysis software (The MathWorks Inc., MA, USA). Preoperative and postoperative tibiofemoral kinematics were determined and compared. The mechanical axes of the tibia and femur were determined and kinematics represented as functions of knee flexion range. Over both the flexing and extending cycles of the knee the changes in tibiofemoral rotation (ΔROT), tibiofemoral ab/adduction (ΔABD), and distances between the origins of the mechanical axes (ΔX, ΔY, ΔZ) were calculated between pre and post-operative states.

Results: The mean differences between pre- and postoperative kinematics for all cases are given as the mean and range in parentheses. For the flexing cycle was ΔROT −0.06 (6.08 to −3.93) degrees, ΔABD was −0.04 (3.39 to −5.72) degrees, ΔX was 0.69 (2.69 to −1.84) mm, ΔY was −0.22 (4.13 to −3.41) mm and was ΔZ 0.27 (4.09 to −1.47) mm. For the extending cycle was ΔROT 0.1 (5.87 to −3.61) degrees, ΔABD was −0.06 (5.72 to −5.95) degrees, ΔX was 0.35 (2.73 to −2.39) mm, ΔY was −0.39 (5.58 to −3.08) mm and was ΔZ 0.21 (3.77 to −1.12) mm. There were no observable differences between the standard and image guided changes in kinematics. Overall, no observable differences were found between pre and post-operative kinematics.

Conclusions: The image guidance system used in our study is a valuable tool for assessing pre- and postoperative knee kinematics. Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with the Phase III instrumentation in the presence of the cruciate mechanism reproduces the normal kinematics of the knee very accurately.