A comparison of short term radiological alignment outcomes of the patient specific and standard instrumentation for primary total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of clinical outcomes of VISIONAIRE patient-specific instrumentation with conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Malalignment and resulting complications are major challenges in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) which patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) is proposed to alleviate. Previous PSI meta-analyses of TKA outcomes typically do not differentiate between PSI systems and assess relatively few outcomes, so the value of their findings is limited. VISIONAIRE™ cutting guides (Smith + Nephew Inc., Memphis, TN, USA) is a PSI system based on preoperative magnetic resonance and X-ray imaging. A systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis, focussed specifically on VISIONAIRE, were conducted to assess TKA accuracy, intraoperative outcomes, and postoperative outcomes, compared with conventional instrumentation (CI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The SLR was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar databases to identify relevant studies published until March 2022. Depending on statistical heterogeneity, meta-analyses were performed for outcome measures with fixed effect (I2 < 50%) or random-effects models (I2 ≥ 50%). Dichotomous outcomes were reported as odds ratios and continuous outcomes were reported as mean differences. Descriptive analyses were performed for outcomes not amenable to meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Outcomes for VISIONAIRE versus CI were reported in 25 studies. Compared with CI, VISIONAIRE reduced odds of mechanical outliers by 40% (p < 0.0001), with no statistically significant differences in odds of overall coronal, sagittal, or rotational plane component outliers. VISIONAIRE improved surgical efficiency (operating room, turnover, and tourniquet times reduced by 7.3% (p = 0.02), 42% (p = 0.022), and 15.9% (p = 0.01), respectively), lowering the odds of blood transfusion by 53% (p = 0.01) and shortening patients' hospital stays (11.1% reduction; p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between groups in incidence of postoperative complications and (descriptively analyzed) return-to-function outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Options for PSI in TKA differ substantially, and it is important to assess the outcomes of individual systems. The current findings suggest that VISIONAIRE guides can lead to improved alignment accuracy and surgical efficiency compared with CI, without compromising postoperative safety and return-to-function outcomes.

Patient-specific instrumentation makes sense in total knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery was initially developed to increase accuracy. The potential PSI benefits have expanded in the last decade, and other advantages have been published. However, different authors are critical of PSI and argue that the advantages are not such and do not compensate for the extra cost. This article aims to describe the recently published advantages and disadvantages of PSI.

AREAS COVERED

Narrative description of the latest publications related to PSI in accuracy, clinical and functional outcomes, operative time, efficiency, and other benefits.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

We have published high accuracy of the system, with a not clinically relevant loss of accuracy, significantly higher precision with PSI than with conventional instruments, and a high percentage of cases in the optimal range and similar to that obtained with computer-assisted navigation, greater imprecision for tibial slope, a significant blood loss reduction, and time consumption, an acceptable and non-significant increase in the cost per procedure and no difference in complications during hospital admission and at 90 days. We think that PSI will not follow the Scott Parabola and that it will continue to be a valuable type of device in some instances of TKA surgery.

Computed Tomography-Based Patient-Specific Instrumentation Loses Accuracy with Significant Varus Preoperative Misalignment

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been introduced to simplify and make total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery more precise, effective, and efficient. We performed this study to determine whether the postoperative coronal alignment is related to preoperative deformity when computed tomography (CT)-based PSI is used for TKA surgery, and how the PSI approach compares with deformity correction obtained with conventional instrumentation. We analyzed pre- and post-operative full length standing hip-knee-ankle (HKA) X-rays of the lower limb in both groups using a convention > 180 degrees for valgus alignment and < 180 degrees for varus alignment. For the PSI group, the mean (± SD) pre-operative HKA angle was 172.09 degrees varus (± 6.69 degrees) with a maximum varus alignment of 21.5 degrees (HKA 158.5) and a maximum valgus alignment of 14.0 degrees. The mean post-operative HKA was 179.43 degrees varus (± 2.32 degrees) with a maximum varus alignment of seven degrees and a maximum valgus alignment of six degrees. There has been a weak correlation among the values of the pre- and post-operative HKA angle. The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of postoperative alignment outside the range of 180 ± 3 degrees was significantly higher with a preoperative varus misalignment of 15 degrees or more (aOR: 4.18; 95% confidence interval: 1.35-12.96; p = 0.013). In the control group (conventional instrumentation), this loss of accuracy occurs with preoperative misalignment of 10 degrees. Preoperative misalignment below 15 degrees appears to present minimal influence on postoperative alignment when a CT-based PSI system is used. The CT-based PSI tends to lose accuracy with preoperative varus misalignment over 15 degrees.

Should we abandon the patient-specific instrumentation ship in total knee arthroplasty? Not quite yet!

Patient-specific Instrumentation (PSI) is an innovative technique aiding the precise implementation of the preoperative plan during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) by using patient-specific guides and cutting blocks. Despite of the theoretical advantages, studies have reported contradictory results, thus there is no consensus regarding the overall effectiveness of PSI. Through the critical assessment of a meta-analysis published lately, this correspondence aims to highlight the complexity of comparing the efficacy of PSI to standard instrumentation (SI). The accuracy of component alignment, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), surgery time, blood loss, transfusion rate, and postoperative complications are commonly used outcomes for investigating the efficacy of PSI-aided TKA. By assessing component alignment, the expertise of the surgeon(s) should be taken into consideration, since PSI may not provide benefits for expert surgeons but might improve accuracy and patient safety during the learning curve of novice surgeons. With respect to PROMs and postoperative complications, PSI may not improve short-term results; however, long-term follow up data is missing. Regarding transfusion rates, favorable trends can be observed, but further studies utilizing recent data are needed for a clear conclusion. When assessing surgery time, we suggest focusing on operating room turnover instead of procedure time.

Patientenspezifische Instrumentierung und Totalendoprothesen am Knie

Hintergrund

Die patientenspezifische Instrumentierung (PSI) ist eine vielversprechende neue Technologie in der orthopädischen Chirurgie, die das Ziel verfolgt, die Implantationstechnik der Knietotalendoprothese (Knie-TEP) im Vergleich zur konventionellen Instrumentierung zu vereinfachen und präziser zu machen. Ziel dieses Artikels ist es, Vorteile und Grenzen der PSI für die primäre Knie-TEP zu beschreiben.

Material und Methoden

Es erfolgte eine umfassende Literaturrecherche zum Thema PSI in der Knieprothetik hinsichtlich Evidenz für Planung, Präzision, klinische Ergebnisse, intraoperative Parameter sowie Kosten und Effizienz.

Ergebnisse

Die dreidimensionale Computertomographie (CT) weist in der präoperativen Planung der Knie-TEP eine höhere Genauigkeit auf als 2‑D-Röntgenaufnahmen. Die meisten Arbeiten postulierten keine signifikanten Effekte zugunsten der Genauigkeit der PSI gegenüber der Standard-Knie-TEP. Aber sie berichteten auch nicht, dass die Genauigkeit mit PSI schlechter sei. Hinsichtlich des klinischen Outcomes gibt es genügend Konsens unter den veröffentlichten Studien, um festzuhalten, dass es kurz- und mittelfristig keinen Unterschied zwischen Patienten gibt, die mit PSI oder konventioneller Technik operiert wurden. Eine große Metaanalyse konnte weder eine kürzere Operationszeit noch eine geringere Komplikationsrate für die PSI-Knie-TEP feststellen. Lediglich der intraoperative Blutverlust erwies sich als niedriger im Vergleich zur Standardtechnik, jedoch mit unveränderter Transfusionsrate. Kosteneffektivitätsanalysen lassen schlussfolgern, dass die PSI aktuell (noch) nicht kosteneffektiv ist.

Diskussion

Obwohl die aktuell vorliegenden Studienergebnisse die PSI-Technologie hinsichtlich vieler messbaren Kriterien nicht eindeutig von der Standardtechnik abheben, zeigt die PSI viele theoretische und praktische Vorteile.

Mid-term functional outcomes of patient-specific versus conventional instrumentation total knee arthroplasty: a prospective study

INTRODUCTION

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) utilizes three-dimensional imaging to produce total knee arthroplasty cutting jigs which matches patient's native anatomy. However, there are limited mid- to long-term studies examining its clinical efficacy. The aim of this study was to compare functional outcomes of PSI surgery versus conventional TKA surgery at 5-year follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty patients were prospectively recruited into either the MRI-based PSI or conventional TKA group. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Knee Society Function Score (KSFS), Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS), while quality of life was evaluated with the Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) of Short-Form 36 and compared between the two groups at 5-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Although the PCS was 7 ± 3 points better in the PSI group preoperatively (p = 0.017), it became 5 ± 2 points worse than the conventional group at 5-year follow-up (p = 0.025). As compared to the PSI group, the conventional group showed a significantly greater improvement in PCS at 5 years as compared to before surgery (p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in KSFS, KSKS, OKS or MCS between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PSI TKA did not result in improved functional outcomes or better quality of life when compared to conventional TKA. The additional costs and waiting time associated with PSI are not justifiable and therefore not recommended as an alternative to conventional TKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Patient-Specific Instrumentation Accuracy Evaluated with 3D Virtual Models

There have been remarkable advances in knee replacement surgery over the last few decades. One of the concerns continues to be the accuracy in achieving the desired alignment. Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) was developed to increase component placement accuracy, but the available evidence is not conclusive. Our study aimed to determine a PSI system’s three-dimensional accuracy on 3D virtual models obtained by post-operative computed tomography. We compared the angular placement values of 35 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) operated within a year obtained with the planned ones, and we analyzed the possible relationships between alignment and patient-reported outcomes. The mean (SD) discrepancies measured by two experienced engineers to the planned values observed were 1.64° (1.3°) for the hip–knee–ankle angle, 1.45° (1.06°) for the supplementary angle of the femoral lateral distal angle, 1.44° (0.97°) for the proximal medial tibial angle, 2.28° (1.78°) for tibial slope, 0.64° (1.09°) for femoral sagittal flexion, and 1.42° (1.06°) for femoral rotation. Neither variables related to post-operative alignment nor the proportion of change between pre-and post-operative alignment influenced the patient-reported outcomes. The evaluated PSI system’s three-dimensional alignment analysis showed a statistically significant difference between the angular values planned and those obtained. However, we did not find a relevant effect size, and this slight discrepancy did not impact the clinical outcome.

Accuracy of empirical distal femoral valgus cut angle of 4° to 6° in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Currently, the best and simplest way that used to select the distal femoral valgus cut (DFVC) angle in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is standing long leg radiograph. However, this kind of film is still not available in all hospitals. The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of different empirical DFVC angles in the restoration of the neutral mechanical alignment of the femoral component after TKA.

METHOD

125 patients who diagnosed primary osteoarthritic knee and underwent unilateral TKA were randomly assigned into three groups: A, B, and C, according to the use of an intramedullary guide with the DFVC angle of 4°, 5°, and 6°, respectively. At three months after surgery, anteroposterior hip-to-ankle computed tomography (CT) scanograms were evaluated. Mechanical axis angle (MAA), mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), femoral bowing, femoral neck-shaft angle (FNSA), and outliers of femoral component position were measured and compared among three groups. Independent influencing factors for the outliers > ±3° were determined using binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Group B was older than group A. There were no significant differences of postoperative MAA, LDFA, femoral bowing, and FNSA among three groups. Outliers > ±3° of femoral component position in each group were 14.6%, 19.0%, and 16.7%, respectively (p = 0.865). When considering the outliers > ±2°, group C (35.7%) had a trend to have fewer outliers than groups A and B (41.5 and 42.9%). However, this finding was not reached the statistical significance (p = 0.778). Femoral bowing was only significantly influencing factors that related to the outliers > ±3° (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that there are no significant differences in coronal femoral component alignment among using the DFVC angle of 4°, 5°, and 6°. The use of the DFVC angle of 6° had a trend to reduce the outliers. Nevertheless, femoral bowing is the crucial influencing factor for selecting the degree of DFVC angle.

Contact kinematics of patient-specific instrumentation versus conventional instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The goal was to evaluate the joint contact kinematics of total knee arthroplasties implanted using patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) compared to conventional instrumentation (CI). We hypothesized that use of PSI would not significantly alter contact kinematics.

METHODS

The study was a prospective randomized controlled trial, with equal allocation of fifty patients to PSI and CI groups. At two years post-operation, patients underwent weight-bearing stereo X-ray examinations at 0°, 20°, 40°, 60°, 80°, and 100° of flexion. The shortest tibiofemoral distance on each condyle determined the contact location. Magnitude of the shortest distance was measured and condylar separation was analyzed using thresholds of 0.5 and 0.75 mm. Kinematic measurements derived from the shortest distance included anteroposterior (AP) translation, excursion, axial rotation, and paradoxical anterior motion. Pivot position and cam/post contact were also investigated.

RESULTS

There were no differences (p > 0.05) in medial and lateral AP contact locations, excursions, and magnitude of anterior motion, or in axial rotation, pivot patterns, frequency of cam/post engagement, frequency of medial anterior motion, and condylar separation at a 0.75 mm threshold. Significant differences were found in frequency of lateral anterior motion (p = 0.048) and condylar separation at a 0.5 mm threshold (p = 0.010). Both groups displayed typical kinematics for a fixed-bearing posterior-stabilized implant.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no major differences in knee kinematics between PSI and CI groups, which suggest that PSI does not provide a significant kinematic advantage over conventional instruments.

Patient-Specific or Conventional Instrumentations: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare knee arthroplasty with patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) with the conventional instrumentation (CI).

Methods

RCTs were selected in PubMed and Embase from 2012 to 2018. Key data extracted included malalignment of mechanical axis, blood loss, surgical time, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Society Score (KSS), length of stay, and complications. Subgroup analysis was also performed regarding different PSI systems and different image processing methods.

Results

29 RCTs with 2487 knees were eligible for the meta-analysis. Results showed that PSI did not improve the alignment of the mechanical axis compared with CI, but MRI-based PSI and Visionaire-specific PSI decrease the risk of malalignment significantly (P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and

Conclusion

PSI reduced the blood loss and improved KSS. MRI-based PSI reduced operative time and risk of malalignment of mechanical axis compared with CT-based PSI. Moreover, Visionaire-specific PSI achieves better alignment result of the mechanical axis than other systems.

Total knee arthroplasty using patient-specific instrumentation for osteoarthritis of the knee: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty using patient-specific instrumentation (TKA-PSI), which are disposable cutting block guides generated to fit each patient's 3-dimensional knee anatomy, has been developed to treat patients with end-stage osteoarthritis of the knee. Surrogate markers such as radiographic malalignment have been well investigated, however, patient-important outcomes are not well examined to elucidate the efficacy of TKA-PSI. The aim of this review is to determine if TKA-PSI improves patient-reported outcome measures (PROM), surgery time, blood loss, transfusion and complications (e.g. surgical site infection, deep venous thrombosis, and revision TKA).

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ongoing clinical trials. For PROMs, surgery time, blood loss, and transfusion rate, we included randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing TKA-PSI and standard TKA to treat osteoarthritis of the knee. For complications, we also included non-randomized comparative studies (non-RCT).

RESULTS

This review includes 38 studies, 24 of which were RCT and 14 of which were non-RCT. These included a total of 3487 patients. The predominant population in the included studies highly reflected the general population, with 62% being female, aged over 60 and having end-stage osteoarthritis of the knee. TKA-PSI did not improve PROMs as compared to standard TKA for less than 1-year (mean difference 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.92-0.97 in the Oxford knee score, mean 3-month follow-up) and for 1-year or more (mean difference 0.25, 95%CI - 4.39-4.89 in the WOMAC score, mean 29-month follow-up). TKA-PSI did not reduce surgery time (mean difference - 3.09 min, 95%CI -6.73-0.55). TKA-PSI decreased blood loss with a small effect size corresponding to a 0.4 g/dl hemoglobin decrease (95%CI 0.18-0.88), but did not decrease transfusion rate (risk difference - 0.04, 95%CI -0.09-0.01). TKA-PSI did not reduce complication rates (risk difference 0.00, 95%CI - 0.01-0.01 in the composite outcome).

CONCLUSIONS

TKA-PSI does not improve patient-reported outcome measures, surgery time, and complication rates as compared to standard TKA. TKA-PSI decreases blood loss with a small effect, which is not enough to reduce transfusion rate.

Patient-Specific Instrumentation Does Not Affect Rotational Alignment of the Femoral Component and Perioperative Blood Loss in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Proposed aims of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are to improve accuracy of component alignment, while reducing blood loss and surgical time. The primary goal of this prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial is to verify whether PSI improves the rotational alignment of the femoral component in comparison to conventionally implanted TKA.

METHODS

One-hundred thirty-three consecutive patients were assessed for eligibility. Block randomization was performed to allocated patients in the treatment (PSI) or control group. During hospital stay, surgical times were recorded, and total blood volume loss and estimated red blood cell were calculated. Two months after surgery, a computed tomography of the knee was obtained to measure femoral component rotation to the transepicondylar axis and tibial component slope.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients were enrolled. PSI did neither result in a significant improvement in femoral component rotation nor result in a reduction of outliers, as compared with conventional instrumentation. No significant improvement in terms of tibial slope, blood loss, total surgical time, and ischemia time could be identified. The number of tibial recuts required in the PSI group was significantly higher than in the control group (P = .0003).

CONCLUSION

PSI does not improve the accuracy of femoral component rotation in TKA in comparison to conventional instrumentation. Moreover, PSI did not appear to influence any of the other variables investigated as secondary goals by this study. The results of this study do not support its routine use during standard TKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, randomized, controlled trial.

Patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most commonly performed orthopedic procedures. During the past decade, patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been commercially introduced in order to simplify and make TKA surgery more effective, precise and efficient than conventional mechanical instrumentation (CI) and computer-assisted surgery (CAS). Nevertheless, there are critical arguments against PSI for routine use. The aim of the current manuscript is to describe advantages and limitations of PSI for primary TKA.

AREAS COVERED

By means of a description of the available literature different aspects are discussed (accuracy, clinical and functional outcomes, operative time, blood loss, efficiency and costs).

EXPERT OPINION

Most publications do not claim a significant increase in PSI accuracy over CI, but they also do not postulate PSIs accuracy is worse either. Regarding clinical aspects, PSI did not appear to give any advantage over standard techniques although, equally, it did not appear to show any disadvantages. PSI seems to reduce operative time, could reduce perioperative blood loss and provides logistical benefits in the operation room. Further studies will be required to more thoroughly assess all the advantages and disadvantages of this promising technology as an alternative to CI and CAS.

A randomized controlled trial investigating the value of patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty in the Canadian healthcare system

Aims

The purpose of the present study was to compare patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) and conventional surgical instrumentation (CSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in terms of early implant migration, alignment, surgical resources, patient outcomes, and costs.

Patients and Methods

The study was a prospective, randomized controlled trial of 50 patients undergoing TKA. There were 25 patients in each of the PSI and CSI groups. There were 12 male patients in the PSI group and seven male patients in the CSI group. The patients had a mean age of 69.0 years (sd 8.4) in the PSI group and 69.4 years (sd 8.4) in the CSI group. All patients received the same TKA implant. Intraoperative surgical resources and any surgical waste generated were recorded. Patients underwent radiostereometric analysis (RSA) studies to measure femoral and tibial component migration over two years. Outcome measures were recorded pre- and postoperatively. Overall costs were calculated for each group.

Results

There were no differences (p > 0.05) in any measurement of migration at two years for either the tibial or femoral components. Movement between one and two years was < 0.2 mm, indicating stable fixation. There were no differences in coronal or sagittal alignment between the two groups. The PSI group took a mean 6.1 minutes longer (p = 0.04) and used a mean 3.4 less trays (p < 0.0001). Total waste generated was similar (10 kg) between the two groups. The PSI group cost a mean CAD$1787 more per case (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

RSA criteria suggest that both groups will have revision rates of approximately 3% at five years. The advantages of PSI were minimal or absent for surgical resources used and waste eliminated, and for meeting target alignment, yet had significantly greater costs. Therefore, we conclude that PSI may not offer any advantage over CSI for routine primary TKA cases. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:565–572.

Patient-specific instrumentation improved axial alignment of the femoral component, operative time and perioperative blood loss after total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present study was to compare patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) with standard instrumentation (SI) in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). PSI is hypothesized to have advantages with respect to component alignment; number of outliers (defined as alignment > 3° from the target alignment); operative time; perioperative blood loss; and length of hospital stay. This new surgical technique is expected to exhibit superior performance.

METHODS

A total of 23 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2058 knees that compared the clinical outcomes of TKA between PSI and SI were included in the present analysis; these RCTs were identified via a literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through March 1, 2018. The outcomes of interest included coronal, sagittal and axial component alignment (presented as the angle of deviation from the transcondylar line); number of outliers; operative time; perioperative blood loss; and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in postoperative femoral axial alignment between PSI and SI patients (95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.21, p = 0.0004, I² = 48%). PSI resulted in approximately 0.4° less deviation from the transcondylar line than SI. Based on our results, PSI reduced operative time by a mean of 7 min compared with SI (95% CI - 10.95 to - 3.75, p < 0.0001, I² = 78%). According to the included literature, PSI reduced perioperative blood loss by approximately 90 ml compared with SI (95% CI - 146.65 to - 20.18, p = 0.01, I² = 74%). We did not find any differences between PSI and SI with respect to any other parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

PSI has advantages in axial alignment of the femoral component, operative time, and perioperative blood loss relative to SI. No significant differences were found between PSI and SI with respect to alignment of the remaining components, number of outliers, or length of hospital stay.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study (systematic review and meta-analysis), Level I.

Clinical Outcome of Total Knee Arthroplasty Performed Using Patient-Specific Cutting Guides

Background

Patient-specific instruments have recently gained attention for ensuring the accuracy of osteotomy and correct alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We aimed to report our experience with TKA performed by using CT-based 3D model of cutting guides in our clinic.

Material/Methods

A total of 36 patients (mean age, 67.58±8.46 years; 24 females, 12 males) who underwent TKA with 3D patient-specific cutting guides in our clinic were included in the study. Differences between preoperatively planned bone resections and actual bone resections were calculated. Femoral and tibial component angles were measured on radiographs of the knee. The change in knee pain was evaluated by patients on a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS). Patients were followed up for 6 months postoperatively.

Results

The actual bone resection was 0.5–1.5 mm higher than the planned resection for all sides, being statistically significant for posterior lateral and distal medial sides (1.1±1.3 mm and 1.5±0.9 mm, respectively; p<0.05). On postoperative radiographs, coronal tibial component angle was 88.8°±0.9° and coronal femoral component angle was 95.2°±1.6°, showing good postoperative alignment. The VAS pain score of patients significantly decreased from preoperative 3.9±0.8 to 1.1±0.9 at 6 months after the operation. One patient developed superficial tissue infection on postoperative follow-up, which was effectively treated. No other pathology was detected in the postoperative period.

Conclusions

Patient-specific cutting guides can provide intraoperative guidance for better placement of the implant in TKA and increase the accuracy of osteotomy and postoperative alignment.

An Approach to Developing Customized Total Knee Replacement Implants

Total knee replacement (TKR) has been performed for patients with end-stage knee joint arthritis to relieve pain and gain functions. Most knee replacement patients can gain satisfactory knee functions; however, the range of motion of the implanted knee is variable. There are many designs of TKR implants; it has been suggested by some researchers that customized implants could offer a better option for patients. Currently, the 3-dimensional knee model of a patient can be created from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) data using image processing techniques. The knee models can be used for patient-specific implant design, biomechanical analysis, and creating bone cutting guide blocks. Researchers have developed patient-specific musculoskeletal lower limb model with total knee replacement, and the models can be used to predict muscle forces, joint forces on knee condyles, and wear of tibial polyethylene insert. These available techniques make it feasible to create customized implants for individual patients. Methods and a workflow of creating a customized total knee replacement implant for improving TKR kinematics and functions are discussed and presented in this paper.