Objective: The postoperative mechanical axis in 36 cases of total knee arthroplasty using navigated and mechanical alignment systems was evaluated and compared. All the operations were performed over the same period by the same surgeon and team, who were beginners in the navigated technique and experienced in the mechanical technique. Methods: Between 2008 and 2010, 36 total knee prostheses were performed and compared: 25 navigated and 11 mechanical procedures. Any deviation from the axis measured on the panoramic postoperative X-ray was considered positive. Results: The navigated prostheses produced a mean axis deviation of 1.32 degrees and standard deviation of 1.57 degrees and the mechanical, respectively 3.18 and 2.99 degrees. There was better alignment with a tendency towards a statistical difference favoring the navigated technique. Conclusion: There were significantly more cases with axis deviation greater than three degrees using the mechanical technique. The navigated technique was incorporated by this team without additional complications and, even without experience of navigated surgery, the initial cases achieved better alignment than with the mechanical technique, and a significantly smaller number of outliers from the three-degree safety zone.

Objective: The postoperative mechanical axis in 36 cases of total knee arthroplasty using navigated and mechanical alignment systems was evaluated and compared. All the operations were performed over the same period by the same surgeon and team, who were beginners in the navigated technique and experienced in the mechanical technique. Methods: Between 2008 and 2010, 36 total knee prostheses were performed and compared: 25 navigated and 11 mechanical procedures. Any deviation from the axis measured on the panoramic postoperative X-ray was considered positive. Results: The navigated prostheses produced a mean axis deviation of 1.32 degrees

Objective: To observe the accuracy and the advantages and disadvantages of the femoral tunnels made by the two techniques. Materials and Methods: We randomly summoned nineteen patients undergoing anatomic ACL reconstruction in a single band technique by the same surgeon: Ten by group II (GII) and nine by Group I (GI). GI: drilling in the technical in-out. GII: drilling the technique out-in. The patients underwent a CT scan with three-dimensional reconstruction of the distal femur. Was applied the technique of quadrants described by Bernard and Hertel and optimized for position by Forsythe and observed in the femoral tunnel: the accuracy of the joint entry; posterior cortical thickness in that point; emergency lateral distance to the lateral epicondyle and the overall length. Results: The coordinates of the distances obtained average was very close, with no statistical difference comparable to that obtained by Bernard and Hertel and Forsythe. The distance from the tunnel exit to the lateral epicondyle obtained average 1.46 cm in GI and 0.47 cm in GII, with a significant statistical difference. The thickness of the posterior cortex was 3.9 mm in GI and 5.4 mm in GII, with no statistical difference. The length averaged was 3.07 cm in GI and GII in 2.94 cm, with no statistical difference. Conclusions: Both techniques allow well placed tunnels, with no statistical difference. In the technique in-out the tunnel exit is closer to the lateral epicondyle. The thickness of the posterior cortex is similar. The length of the femoral tunnel is similar and around 3 cm.