Background: Precise and accurate alignments in total knee arthroplasty are important predictors for survivorship and functional outcomes. We aim to compare accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) to conventional instrumentation (CONV), patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) and computer-assisted surgery (CAS) in published literature. Methods: A systematic search of publications from databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane) was obtained from inception to 15 August 2018. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool odd ratios for outliers greater than 3 for the hip-knee-ankle, coronal and sagittal femoral and tibial angles (CFA, CTA, SFA, STA). Secondary outcomes included procedural characteristics and functional outcomes. Results: Thirteen studies, involving 1566 patients, met inclusion that compared ABN (50.2%) to CONV (49.8%) and five comparing ABN to CAS/PSI. The pooled odds ratios for percent outliers of greater than 3 from the mechanical axis for the hip-knee-ankle (relative risk 0.58, P = <0.05) and CFA (relative risk 0.42, P = 0.02) was significantly lower for ABN compared to CONV. The pooled odds ratios for CTA, SFA and STA were not significantly different. No differences were identified in comparison to PSI/CAS. There was no statistically significant difference in procedural characteristics and functional outcomes. Conclusions: The use ABN in total knee arthroplasty is a successful method of increased precision and accuracy for the restoration of the mechanical axis. In addition, there is no significant compromise in procedural or functional outcomes.

Background Supracondylar humerus fractures are common in children. Percutaneous pinning remains the mainstay in treatment; however, there is lack of consensus on the optimal configuration: lateral‐only pinning or cross pinning. This study aims to investigate the differences in clinical and surgical outcomes between lateral‐only and cross‐pinning paediatric supracondylar humerus fractures. Methods A systematic search was performed using Medline Ovid, Embase and Cochrane databases for relevant randomized control trials comparing lateral and cross pinning of paediatric supracondylar humerus fractures, reporting at least one of the following: rate of iatrogenic ulnar nerve injury, loss of reduction, infection, loss of Baumann's angle and loss of carrying angle. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 13.0. Results Eleven suitable randomized control trials involving 900 patients were reviewed. Loss of reduction was more common with lateral pinning (relative risk 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.04–2.00, P = 0.027). Iatrogenic ulnar nerve injury was less common in lateral pinning with treatment‐based analysis (relative risk 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.14–0.92, P = 0.032). There was no statistically significant difference in loss of carrying angle, loss of Baumann angle or rate of infection. Conclusion Cross pinning provides superior stability in the treatment of supracondylar humerus fractures in children; however, it carries greater risk of iatrogenic ulnar nerve injury.

No abstract

No abstract