ArticleArthroplasty today2023
A Comparative Evaluation of Conventional Instrumentation and Accelerometer-Based Navigation in the Practice of a High-Volume Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) Surgeon.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical outcomes following mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients with varying degrees of perioperative alignment change.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Component malpositioning and joint malalignment following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) increase the risk for revision. This study investigates whether accelerometer-based navigation (NAV) decreases radiographic outliers with respect to component placement and joint alignment in comparison to conventional instrumentation in UKA. Methods: A radiographic review of UKAs was performed by a single surgeon following adoption of an accelerometry-guided navigation system (OrthAlign, Aliso Viejo, CA). This cohort was then compared to previous patients undergoing UKA with conventional instrumentation. Six-week postoperative radiographs were used to compare femoral coronal and sagittal angles, tibial coronal and sagittal angles, the net coronal angle, tibial component rotation, and medial tibial overhang. Outliers in implant positioning were compared between groups. Patient variables including age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiology, and surgical time (incision until the start of closure) were also compared between groups. Results: Eighty-eight UKA's were reviewed (49 conventional instrumentation [CI] patients; 39 NAV patients). Using 2-sample t-tests, no significant differences were found in patient demographics, radiographic parameters, and operative times between the CI and NAV cohorts. Using chi-squared tests, no significant difference was found in the number of radiographic outliers between the CI and NAV cohorts. Conclusions: Our study found that a high-volume UKA surgeon achieved a low rate of radiographic outliers in both NAV and CI cohorts. This data suggests that NAV is no different from conventional instrumentation with respect to implant positioning, overall joint alignment, and operative time when used by a high-volume UKA surgeon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.