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

[New technologies in total knee arthroplasty : Current concepts and personalized treatment strategies]

BACKGROUND

In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), there is a trend towards personalized concepts. This includes the implementation of new technologies and the increasing popularity of individualized alignment strategies.

TARGETS

The purpose of personalized TKA is to restore the patient's bony anatomy and constitutional alignment, as well as the physiological soft tissue balance and joint kinematics. Modern technologies facilitate a thorough, three-dimensional analysis of the bony structures and the patient's constitutional alignment. Virtual planning enables a simulation component placement, gap balancing and postoperative alignment. After approval of the surgical plan, the technology-aided execution shows a greater accuracy, precision and reproducibility of implant alignment compared to conventional manual instrumentation.

OVERVIEW

This article focuses on novel technologies in total knee arthroplasty, including patient-specific instrumentation (PSI), custom implants, navigation and robotics. The purpose of this article is to summarize current evidence, including radiological and functional outcomes, as well as economic aspects. Furthermore, the implementation of novel technologies in the context of personalized alignment strategies will be discussed.

Efficiency assessment of intelligent patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the practical use of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been reported previously with both advantage and disadvantage. The application of artificial intelligent (AI) forces overwhelmingly development of medical industries, while the impact of AI on PSI efficiency remains unknown. Thus, this study aimed to assess the efficiency of Intelligent-PSI (i-PSI) in TKA, compared with the conventional instrumentation-TKA (CI).

METHODS

102 late-stage OA patients who met inclusive criteria were recruited in this prospective randomized controlled trial and separated into two groups (i-PSI vs. CI). In both groups, an AI preoperative planning engine was applied for surgery decision making. In CI group, conventional instrumentation was applied for bony resection, while resection of i-PSI group was completed with i-PSI. A convolutional neural network was applied to automatically process computer tomography images and thus produced i-PSI. With the help of three-dimension printing, the workflow of production was largely simplified. AI-driven preoperative planning guided resection and alignment decisions. Resection measurement, perioperative radiography and perioperative clinical outcomes were analyzed to verify efficiency of i-PSI.

RESULTS

In resection outcomes, smaller deviation of lateral and medial distal femoral resection were found in i-PSI group than CI group (P = 0.032 and 0.035), while no difference was found in other resection planes. In radiography outcomes, postoperative coronal alignments of i-PSI group, including postoperative Hip-knee-ankle axis (HKA) (P = 0.025), postoperative HKA outliners (P = 0.042), Femoral coronal alignment (FCA) (P = 0.019) and Joint line convergence angle (JLCA) (P = 0.043) showed closer to neutral position than CI group. Moreover, Femoral sagittal alignment (FSA) of i-PSI group showed closer to neutral position than CI group(P = 0.005). No difference was found in other alignments. In clinical outcomes, i-PSI group seemed to cost more surgical time than CI group (P = 0.027), while others showed no differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Intelligent Patient-specific Instrumentation in TKA achieved simplified production flow than conventional PSI, while also showed more accurate resection, improved synthesis position and limb alignment than conventional instrumentation. Above all, this study proved that i-PSI being an applicable and promising tool in TKA.

Patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: a review of the current literature

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most frequently performed interventions in the field of Orthopaedic surgery. Over the last decades the implantation technique has improved continuously. The majority of patients is satisfied with the clinical outcome of TKA. However in various clinical follow-ups, up to 20% of unsatisfied patients can be observed. Periprosthetic infection and aseptic loosening seem to be the most common reasons for failure. Malalignment has been discussed as a cause of aseptic loosening and often leads to revision surgery. In order to increase the precision of implant positioning and alignment, new technologies such as patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) have been developed. Since the introduction of PSI, multiple clinical studies have been performed analyzing the clinical and radiological outcome of TKA with PSI technique. This review covers the recent literature of PSI in respect to surgical accuracy, clinical outcome, time- and cost-effectiveness.

The efficacy and safety of patient-specific instrumentation in primary total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery has been shown to increase accuracy of component positioning. However, it is unclear whether this also translates to actual benefits for patients in terms of better outcomes (efficacy) or less complications such as revisions (safety). We therefore systematically reviewed the literature to determine the efficacy and safety of PSI in primary TKA.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing PSI to non-PSI in primary TKA were included. A random effects model was used with meta-regression in case of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were included with a total of 1816 TKA in the PSI group and 1887 TKA in the control group. There were no clinically relevant differences between the PSI-group and non-PSI group regarding all outcomes. There was considerable heterogeneity: meta-regression analyses showed that the year the study was published was an important effect modifier. Early publications tended to show a positive effect for PSI compared to non-PSI TKA, whereas later studies found the opposite.

CONCLUSION

Based on evidence of moderate certainty, our study suggested that there were no clinically relevant differences in efficacy and safety between patients treated with PSI TKA and patients treated with non-PSI TKA.

Could surgical transepicondylar axis be identified accurately in preoperative 3D planning for total knee arthroplasty? A reproducibility study based on 3D-CT

BACKGROUND

Surgical transepicondylar axis (sTEA) is frequently used for positioning of femoral component rotation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Previous studies showed that intraoperative identification of sTEA was not reliable. While surgeons or engineers need to identify sTEA with three-dimensional (3D) computer-aid techniques pre- or intraoperatively, the reproducibility of sTEA identification on preoperative 3D images has not been explored yet. This study aimed to investigate the reproducibility of identifying sTEA in preoperative planning based on computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

Fifty-nine consecutive patients (60 knees involved) who received TKA in our center from April 2019 to June 2019 were included in this study. Six experienced TKA surgeons identified sTEA three times on 3D model established on the basis of knee CT data. The projection angle of each sTEA and the posterior condyle axis on the transverse plane were measured and analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall intra-observer reproducibility was moderate. The median intra-observer variation was 1.27°, with a maximum being up to 14.07°. The median inter-observer variation was 1.24°, and the maximum was 11.47°. The overall intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-observer was 0.528 (95% CI 0.417, 0.643).

CONCLUSION

The identification of sTEA on a 3D model established on the basis of knee CT data may not be reliable. Combined with the previous cadaveric and surgical studies, caution should be exercised in determining femoral component rotation by referencing sTEA both preoperatively and intraoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Patient-specific guides in orthopedic surgery

The interest of patient-specific guides (PSGs) lies in reliable intraoperative achievement of preoperative planning goals. They are a form of instrumentation optimizing intraoperative precision and thus improving the safety and reproducibility of surgical procedures. Clinical superiority, however, has not been demonstrated. The various steps from design to implementation leave room for error, which needs to be known and controlled by the surgeon who is responsible for final outcome. Instituting large-scale patient-specific surgery requires management systems for guides and innovative implants which cannot be a simple extension of current practices. We shall approach the present state of knowledge regarding PSGs via 5 questions: (1) What is a PSG? Single-use instrumentation produced after preoperative planning, aiming exclusively to optimize procedural exactness. (2) How to use and assess PSGs in orthopedic surgery? Strict rules of use must be adhered to. Any deviation from the predefined objective is, necessarily, an error that must be identified as such. (3) Do PSGs provide greater surgical exactness? The contribution of PSGs varies greatly between procedures. Exactness is enhanced in the spine, in osteotomies around the knee and in bone-tumor surgery. In the shoulder, their contribution is seen only in complex cases. Data are sparse for hip replacement, and controversial for knee replacement. (4) What are the expected benefits of PSGs? As well as improving exactness, PSGs allow a lower radiation dose and shorter operating time. They also enable junior surgeons to train in techniques otherwise reserved to hyperspecialists. (5) How to include PSGs in everyday practice? As well as their potential clinical interest, PSGs involve deep changes in organization, equipment provision and economic model. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V; expert opinion.

[Research progress on comparison of the application effects between personal specific instrumentation and computer-assisted navigation surgery in total knee arthroplasty]

OBJECTIVE

To compare the application effects between personal specific instrumentation (PSI) and computer-assisted navigation surgery (CAS) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

The literature comparing the application effects of PSI and CAS in TKA in recent years was widely consulted, and the difference between PSI-TKA and CAS-TKA in operation time, lower limb alignment, blood loss, and knee function were compared.

RESULTS

Compared to CAS-TKA, PSI-TKA simplifies operation procedures and shortens operation time but probably has worse lower limb alignment. It is still controversial in comparison of perioperative blood loss and knee function between two techniques.

CONCLUSION

PSI-TKA and CAS-TKA both have advantages and disadvantages, and their differences need to be confirmed by further high-quality clinical trial.

New Technologies in Knee Arthroplasty: Current Concepts

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an effective treatment for severe osteoarthritis. Despite good survival rates, up to 20% of TKA patients remain dissatisfied. Recently, promising new technologies have been developed in knee arthroplasty, and could improve the functional outcomes. The aim of this paper was to present some new technologies in TKA, their current concepts, their advantages, and limitations. The patient-specific instrumentations can allow an improvement of implant positioning and limb alignment, but no difference is found for functional outcomes. The customized implants are conceived to reproduce the native knee anatomy and to reproduce its biomechanics. The sensors have to aim to give objective data on ligaments balancing during TKA. Few studies are published on the results at mid-term of these two devices currently. The accelerometers are smart tools developed to improve the TKA alignment. Their benefits remain yet controversial. The robotic-assisted systems allow an accurate and reproducible bone preparation due to a robotic interface, with a 3D surgical planning, based on preoperative 3D imaging or not. This promising system, nevertheless, has some limits. The new technologies in TKA are very attractive and have constantly evolved. Nevertheless, some limitations persist and could be improved by artificial intelligence and predictive modeling.

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.