Sensor-Assisted Total Knee Replacement

VERASENSE^TM SENSOR-ASSISTED TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT

VERASENSE^TM, a wireless orthopaedic sensor device used during primary and revision total knee replacement (TKR), enables surgeons to make evidence-based decisions on soft tissue balance and implant position - two factors that can improve patient outcomes. ^1,2

How VERASENSE^TM Works

The disposable sensor device leverages technology similar to those used in smartphones and gaming applications. TKR is a common procedure, but before VERASENSE, surgeons generally relied solely on their “best judgment” in determining what “felt” like a balanced and stable knee.

During your TKR procedure, your surgeon uses VERASENSE to replace the standard tibial trial spacer. As the knee is taken through a full range of motion, the sensor sends data wirelessly to a monitor in the operating room, which provides information on compartmental loads within your knee. With the use of the the real-time data from the sensor, VERASENSE aids in your surgeon’s decision-making about soft tissue adjustments and implant position. Improper soft tissue balance and implant position may result in premature implant failure and the need for revision surgery in the future. ^3-6

Benefits of Sensor-Assisted TKR

Patients whose knees were balanced through VERASENSE Sensor-Assisted TKR have shown statistically significant improvements over patients whose knees were left unbalanced.  Patients whose surgeon uses VERASENSE sensor-assisted technology during total knee replacement may experience:

• Less pain
• Quicker return to normal activity
• Improved knee function
• Improved patient satisfaction^1,2

Knee instability is a leading cause of patient dissatisfaction after total knee replacement surgery.^2,7 In a multi-center study, use of VERASENSE has been shown to reduce post-op pain and improve activity and patient satisfaction scores with statistical significance. In fact, 97% of patients whose knees were balanced using VERASENSE reported they were satisfied to very satisfied at one and two years following their total knee replacement. This compares favorably to peer-reviewed publications that show an average of 81% patient satisfaction after a total knee replacement.^1,2 That’s a 16% improvement in patient satisfaction for balanced knees; the first significant-notable increase of patient-reported satisfaction in over 30 years.

VERASENSE does not change surgical workflow or a surgeon’s decision on which implant design would be best for you. The procedure is the same, but with the use of the intraoperative data from this sensor device, surgeons aim to improve the balance and stability of your knee, allowing for improved patient outcomes when compared to a traditional TKR and the potential for a longer lifespan of your knee implant. ^1-6

Learn more about Sensor-Assisted Total Knee Replacement:

At SCOI, Dr. Jaime Hernandez uses VERASENSE^TM  in Sensor-Assisted Total Knee Replacement. For more information about the use of VERASENSE in TKR or to make an appointment, call (818) 901-6600.

References:

1 Gustke KA, et al. Primary TKA patients with Quantifiably Balanced Soft-Tissue Achieve Significant Clinical Gains Sooner than Unbalanced Patients. Adv Orthop. 2014:628695.
2 Gustke K, et al. Increased Patient Satisfaction After Total Knee replacement using sensor-guided technology. Bone Joint J. 2014 Oct;96-B(10):1333-8.
3 Parratte S, Pagnano MW. Instability after total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90: 184–94.
4 Lombardi AV Jr1, Berend KR1, Adams JB1. Why knee replacements fail in 2013: patient, surgeon, or implant? Bone Joint J. 2014 Nov;96-B(11 Supple A):101-4.
5 Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Chiu V, Vail TP, Rubash HE, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2010; 468(1):45–51.
6 Rodriguez-Merchan, EC. Instability Following Total Knee Arthroplasty. HSS J. Oct 2011; 7(3): 273–278.
7 Bourne RB, Chesworth B, Davis A, Mahomed N, Charron K. Comparing Patient Outcomes After THA and TKA: Is There a Difference? Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2010;468(2):542-546.