Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Results with eight and a half years average follow-up on two hundred and eight e-Motion FP® knee prostheses, fitted using computer navigation for knee osteoarthritis in patients with over ten degrees genu varum

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to analyse the clinical and radiographic results of 208 e-Motion® posterior cruciate-retaining, mobile bearing prostheses (BBraun-Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) fitted using computer navigation, for knee osteoarthritis with a genu varum greater than 10°.

Methods

One hundred ninety-two patients were operated on with 208 e-Motion® prostheses fitted, between January 2006 and December 2011, using the OrthoPilot® computer navigation system. Average pre-operative IKS score was 70 ± 27 points (6-143) with a function score of 38 ± 20.5 (0-90) and a knee score of 32.5 ± 13 (0-63). Average flexion was 116.5° ± 13° (65-140°). Average pre-operative HKA angle was 166° ± 3° (154-169°).

Results

2Results are available for 134 patients, with a total of 150 knees operated on (38 lost to follow-up and 20 deceased). Average follow-up was 104.5 months (60-116 months). On last follow-up, the average IKS was 180 ± 22 points (95-200) with 86.5 ± 16 points (25-100) for the function score and 93.5 ± 8 points (55-100) for the knee score. Knee flexion was 116° ± 10.5° (80-135°) and average HKA angle was 179° ± 2° (175-184°). The pre-operative objective was achieved in 90.5% of knees.

Conclusion

The e-Motion® mobile bearing posterior cruciate-retaining prosthesis, fitted using computer navigation, offers excellent results after an average of 8.5 years follow-up. These results are at least equivalent, even superior, to those of the posterior-stabilised prostheses usually used for this type of deformity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Haute Autorité de Santé (2012) Implants articulaires du genou. Révision de catégories homogènes de dispositifs médicaux. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c_1345397/fr/implants-articulaires-de-genou

  2. Insall JN, Hood RW, Flawn LB, Sullivan DJ (1983) The total condylar knee prosthesis in gonarthrosis. A five to nine-year follow-up of the first one hundred consecutive replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65:619–628

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM (2002) Insall award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop 404:7–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Teeny SM, Krackow KA, Hungerford DS, Jones M (1991) Primary total knee arthroplasty in patients with severe varus deformity. A comparative study. Clin Orthop 273:19–31

    Google Scholar 

  5. Laskin RS (1996) The Insall award. Total knee replacement with posterior cruciate ligament retention in patients with a fixed varus deformity. Clin Orthop 331:29–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Saragaglia D, Picard F, Chaussard C et al (2001) Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty: comparison with a conventional procedure. Results of 50 cases in a prospective randomized study. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 87:18–28

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jenny JY, Boeri C (2001) Computer-assisted implantation of a total knee arthroplasty: a case-controlled study in comparison with classical instrumentation. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 87:645–652

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hart R, Janecek M, Chaker A, Bucek P (2003) Total knee arthroplasty implanted with and without kinematic navigation. Int Orthop 27:366–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-003-0501-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Bejek Z, Sólyom L, Szendrõi M (2007) Experiences with computer navigated total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 31:617–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-006-0254-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Saragaglia D (2009) Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty: 12 years experience in Grenoble. Emém Acad Nat Chir 8:53–58

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ewald FC (1989) The knee society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop 248:9–12

    Google Scholar 

  12. Saragaglia D, Roberts J (2005) Navigated osteotomies around the knee in 170 patients with osteoarthritis secondary to genu varum. Orthopedics 28(Suppl 10):S1269–S1274

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lee S-Y, Yang J-H, Lee Y-I, Yoon J-R (2016) A novel medial soft tissue release method for Varus deformity during total knee arthroplasty: femoral origin release of the medial collateral ligament. Knee Surg Relat Res 28:153–160. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.2016.28.2.153

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Mullaji AB, Shetty GM (2013) Surgical technique: computer-assisted sliding medial condylar osteotomy to achieve gap balance in varus knees during TKA. Clin Orthop 471:1484–1491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2773-x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Verdonk PC, Pernin J, Pinaroli A, Ait Si Selmi T, Neyret P (2009) Soft tissue balancing in varus total knee arthroplasty: an algorithmic approach. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:660–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-009-0755-715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sim JA, Lee YS, Kwak JH, Yang SH, Kim KH, Lee BK (2013) Comparison of complete distal release of the medial collateral ligament and medial epicondylar osteotomy during ligament balancing in varus knee total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 5:287–291. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2013.5.4.287

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Cho W-S, Byun S-E, Lee S-J, Yoon J (2015) Laxity after complete release of the medial collateral ligament in primary total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:1816–1823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3288-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Koh HS, In Y (2013) Semimembranosus release as the second step of soft tissue balancing in varus total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 28:273–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2012.06.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Saragaglia D, Chaussard C, Rubens-Duval B (2006) Navigation as a predictor of soft tissue release during 90 cases of computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 29:S137–S138

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bellemans J (2011) Multiple needle puncturing: balancing the varus knee. Orthopedics 34:e510–e512. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20110714-48

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Meneghini RM, Daluga AT, Sturgis LA, Lieberman JR (2013) Is the pie-crusting technique safe for MCL release in varus deformity correction in total knee arthroplasty? J Arthroplast 28:1306–1309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Saragaglia D, Picard F (2004) Computer-assisted implantation of total knee endoprosthesis with no preoperative imaging: the kinematic model. In: Navigation and robotics in total joint and spine surgery. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, p 226–233

  23. Whiteside LA (1995) Ligament release and bone grafting in total arthroplasty of the varus knee. Orthopedics 18:117–123. https://doi.org/10.3928/0147-7447-19950201-09

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Berger RA, Crossett LS, Jacobs JJ, Rubash HE (1998) Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 356:144–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Matsuda S, Miura H, Nagamine R, Urabe K, Hirata G, Iwamoto Y (2001) Effect of femoral and tibial component position on patellar tracking following total knee arthroplasty: 10-year follow-up of Miller-Galante I knees. Am J Knee Surg 14:152–156

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Petersen W, Rembitzki IV, Brüggemann GP, Ellermann A, Best R, Koppenburg AG, Liebau C (2014) Anterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty: a narrative review. Int Orthop 38:319–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-2081-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Parratte S, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ (2010) Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:2143–2149. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.01398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ritter MA, Davis KE, Meding JB, Pierson JL, Berend ME, Malinzak RA (2011) The effect of alignment and BMI on failure of total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:1588–1596. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.00772

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kubiak P, Archibeck MJ, White RE (2008) Cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty in patients with at least fifteen degrees of coronal plane deformity. J Arthroplast 23:366–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2007.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Seon JK, Song EK (2006) Navigation-assisted less invasive total knee arthroplasty compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty: a randomized prospective trial. J Arthroplast 21:777–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

There is no funding source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sport Traumatology, Grenoble South Teaching Hospital, 38130, Échirolles, France

    Dominique Saragaglia, Loic Sigwalt, Julia Gaillot, Vincent Morin, Brice Rubens-Duval & Régis Pailhé

Authors
  1. Dominique Saragaglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Loic Sigwalt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Julia Gaillot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vincent Morin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Brice Rubens-Duval
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Régis Pailhé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominique Saragaglia.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest related to this article. D. Saragaglia receives royalties from BBraun related to the e-Motion Knee Prosthesis. The other authors had, sometimes, financial support for attending orthopaedic meetings.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saragaglia, D., Sigwalt, L., Gaillot, J. et al. Results with eight and a half years average follow-up on two hundred and eight e-Motion FP® knee prostheses, fitted using computer navigation for knee osteoarthritis in patients with over ten degrees genu varum. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 42, 799–804 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3618-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3618-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation