Accurate implant position in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can potentially lead to better long-term functional outcomes and implant survival. Recent studies on whether better clinical results could be obtained from computer-navigated or conventional TKA were inconclusive. In addition, recent reviews only included short-term follow-up studies without performing quantitative mid- to long-term follow-up analysis. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing mid- to long-term clinical outcomes (such as knee scoring and functional results) and radiological outcomes (such as normal alignment of the limb axis or component) between computer-navigated TKA and conventional TKA to determine which method of TKA could obtain better clinical and radiological results.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, and SCOPUS electronic databases were searched for relevant articles published through August 2018 that compared outcomes of computer-navigated TKA and conventional TKA. Data search, extraction, analysis, and quality assessment were performed according to the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. Clinical and radiological outcomes of both techniques were evaluated using various outcome measures.
Seven randomized controlled trials were included. Based on Knee Society Scores, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, pain, and range of motion, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two techniques. Based on outliers from the normal axis, outliers of femoral components in the coronal plane, and outliers of tibial components in the coronal plane, radiologic outcomes showed no significant differences between the two techniques either.
The present study revealed that there were no significant differences in clinical or radiological outcomes between computer-navigated TKA and conventional TKA. It remains unclear which TKA technique yields better results in terms of mid- to long-term clinical and radiological outcomes.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: