The review provides literature data about the use of computer navigation system in total knee arthroplasty. The reasons and structure of revision operations, which are necessary when the result of primary arthroplasty is unsatisfactory, and possible ways for reducing their number, are described. There are defined advantages and disadvantages of using the computer navigation system. The research data is presented to compare navigation and traditional techniques of total knee arthroplasty by such parameters as position of components, restoration of the correct mechanical axis, period of validity of endoprosthesis, and the quality of limb function restoration. The lead role for wide distribution of navigation systems was played by their influence on reducing the frequency of revision operations and better functional outcomes.

1. Безгодков Ю. А., Корнилов Н. Н., Петухов А. И., Куляба Т. А., Селин А. В., Муранчик Ю. И., Кроитору И. И., Игнатенко В. Л., Сараев А. В. Биомеханические показатели стояния и походки больных после тотального эндопротезирования коленного сустава с использованием компьютерной навигации. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2011; 4: 11–17.

2. Корж Н. А., Дедух Н. В., Зупанец И. А. Остеоартроз: консервативная терапия: Монография под. ред. Н. А. Коржа – Харьков: Золотые страницы, 2007. – 424 с.

3. Корнилов Н. Н., Т. А. Куляба, А. С. Филь, Ю. В. Муравьёва. Данные регистра эндопротезирования коленного сустава РНИИТО им. Р. Р. Вредена за 2011–2013 годы. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2015; 1(75): 136–151.

4. Baumbach J. A., Willburger R., Haaker R., Dittrich M., Kohler S. 10-Year Survival of Navigated Versus Conventional TKAs: A Retrospective Study. Orthopedics. 2016 May; 39 (3 Suppl): 72–6.

5. Berend M. E., Ritter M. A., Meding JB, et al. Tibial component failure mechanisms in total knee arthroplasty. Clin OrthopRelat Res. 2004; 428: 26–34.

6. Brown M. J., Matthews J. R., Bayers-Thering M. T., Phillips M. J., Krackow K. A. Low incidence of postoperative complications with navigated total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Jul; 32(7): 2120–2126.

7. Cram P., Lu X., Kates S. L., Singh J. A., Li Y., Wolf B. R. Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991–2010. JAMA. 2012; 308(12): 1227–1236.

8. Deep K., Shankar S. & Mahendra A. Computer assisted navigation in total knee and hip arthroplasty. SICOT J 2017; 3: 50.

9. Dutton, A. Q. Computer-assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty compared with standard total knee arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized study. J. Bone Joint Surg 2008; 1: 2–9.

10. Friedman R. J., Navigation in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Procedure Whose Time Has Not Come. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99: e64(1–2).

11. Khuangsirikul S., Lekkreusuwan K. & Chotanaphuti T. 10-Year patient satisfaction compared between computerassisted navigation and conventional techniques in minimally invasive surgery total knee arthroplasty. Computer Assisted Surgery 2016; 21: 172–175.

12. Kim Y. H., Park J. W., Kim J. S. “The Clinical Outcome of Computer-Navigated Compared with Conventional Knee Arthroplasty in the Same Patients. A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Long-Term Study” J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017 Jun 21; 99(12): 989–996.

13. Loh B., Chen J. Y., Yew A. K., Pang H. N., Tay D. K., Chia S. L., Lo N. N., Yeo S. J. The accuracy of a hand-held navigation system in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 24 Jan 2017; 137(3): 381–386.

14. Mahaluxmivala J., Bankes M. J., Nicolai P., Aldam C. H., Allen P. W. The effect of surgeon experience on component positioning in 673 press fit condylar posterior cruciatesacrificing total knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty. 2001; 16(5): 635–640.

15. Morawietz L., Gehrke T., Classen R. A., et al. Proposal for the classification of the periprosthetic membrane from loosened hip and knee endoprostheses. Pathologe. 2004; 25(5): 375–384.

16. Sikorski J. M., Chauhan S. Computer-Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery: Do we need CAOS? J Bone Joint Surg 2003; 85-B: 319–323.