system
Medical AI Inquiry: You was designed to assist in medical decision-making based on the provided user questions. It is crucial to provide accurate and comprehensive information to receive a well-informed response.  Labels: OBJECTIVE, METHODS, RESULTS. Meshes: Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Ankle Joint, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee, Female, Femur Head Necrosis, Hip Joint, Humans, Knee Joint, Knee Prosthesis, Male, Middle Aged, Osteoarthritis, Knee, Range of Motion, Articular, Software, Surgery, Computer-Assisted, Tibia, Treatment Outcome.
user
Does navigation of the tibial plateau alone appear to be sufficient in computer-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? Context: The aim of this study was to present our technique to implant unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) using navigation and to give our first results regarding the accuracy of the device. A total of 33 patients with medial femorotibial osteoarthritis (31) or avascular necrosis (2) were included in this study. The mean preoperative hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle was 172.7 ± 2.2° (range 167-177°) and the preoperative planning aimed to reach an HKA angle between 175 and 179° (177 ± 2°), a tibial varus at 3 ± 1°, which means a tibial mechanical angle (TMA) close to 87 ± 1°, and posterior tibial slope at 3 ± 2°. In all cases, we used the OrthoPilot® device with dedicated software allowing us to navigate only the tibial plateau. The preoperative plan was reached in 93.9 % of cases for HKA angle, 84.8 % for TMA and 100 % for the posterior slope.
assistant
Unicompartmental knee navigation is reliable. The navigation of only the tibial bone cut is a reasonable option as has been shown in this study. Its role is invaluable in the positioning of mobile-bearing UKA, where the risk of overcorrection should not be underestimated. Final Decision: yes