Top

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Published in:

01-11-2016 | Knee

Abnormal rate of intraoperative and postoperative implant positioning outliers using “MRI-based patient-specific” compared to “computer assisted” instrumentation in total knee replacement

Authors: M. Ollivier, Q. Tribot-Laspiere, J. Amzallag, P. Boisrenoult, N. Pujol, P. Beaufils

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 11/2016

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to analyze first intraoperative alignment and reason to abandon the use of patient-specific instrumentation using intraoperative CAS measurement, secondly assess by postoperative CT analysis if CI, based on preoperative 3D-MRI data, improved postoperative component positioning (including femoral rotation) and lower limb alignment as compared with results obtained with CAS.

Methods

In this randomized controlled trial, 80 consecutive patients scheduled to undergo TKA were enrolled. Eligible knees were randomized to the group of PSI-TKAs (n = 40) or to the group of CAS-TKAs (n = 40). In the CAS group, CAS determined and controlled cutting block positioning in each plane. In the PSI group, CAS allowed to measure adequacy of intraoperative alignment including femoral component rotation. At 3 months after surgery, implants position were measured and analyzed with full-weight bearing plain radiographs and CT scan.

Results

Intraoperatively, there was a significant difference concerning Sagittal Femoral mechanical, Frontal tibial mechanical angle and tibial slope between the two groups (respectively p = 0.01, p = 0.02, p = 0.046). Custom instrumentation was abandoned intraoperatively in seven knees (17.5 %). Abnormal tibial cuts were responsible of the abandon in three out of seven cases, femoral cut in 1/7 and dual abnormalities in 3/7. Postoperatively, tibial slope outliers percentage was higher in the patient specific instrumentation group with six patients (18.18 %) versus one patient (2.5 %) in the CAS group (p = 0.041).

Conclusion

Patient specific instrumentation was associated with an important number of hazardous cut and a higher rate of outliers in our series and thus should be used with caution as related to. This study is the first to our acknowledgement to compare intra-operative ancillary and implant positioning of PSI-TKA and CAS-TKA. High rate of malposition are sustained by our findings, as such PSI-TKA should be used with caution, by surgeons capable to switch to conventional instrumentation intra-operatively.

Level of evidence

Randomized control trial, Level I.

Akagi M, Matsusue Y, Mata T, Asada Y, Horiguchi M, Iida H, Nakamura T (1999) Effect of rotational alignment on patellar tracking in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 366:155–163CrossRef

Anouchi YS, Whiteside LA, Kaiser AD, Milliano MT (1993) The effects of axial rotational alignment of the femoral component on knee stability and patellar tracking in total knee arthroplasty demonstrated on autopsy specimens. Clin Orthop Relat Res 287:170–177

Asada S, Mori S, Matsushita T, Nakagawa K, Tsukamoto I, Akagi M (2014) Comparison of MRI- and CT-based patient-specific guides for total knee arthroplasty. Knee 21(6):1238–1243CrossRefPubMed

Bargren JH, Blaha JD, Freeman MA (1983) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Correlated biomechanical and clinical observations. Clin Orthop Relat Res 173:178–183

Barrett WP, Mason JB, Moskal JT, Dalury DF, Oliashirazi A, Fisher DA (2011) Comparison of radiographic alignment of imageless computer-assisted surgery vs conventional instrumentation in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26:1273.e1–1284.e1CrossRef

Beldame J, Boisrenoult P, Beaufils P (2010) Pin track induced fractures around computer-assisted TKA. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:249–255CrossRefPubMed

Bellemans J, Robijns F, Duerinckx J, Banks S, Vandenneucker H (2005) The influence of tibial slope on maximal flexion after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13:193–196CrossRefPubMed

Berger RA, Crossett LS, Jacobs JJ, Rubash HE (1998) Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 356:144–153CrossRef

Bonutti P, Dethmers D, Stiehl JB (2008) Case report: femoral shaft fracture resulting from femoral tracker placement in navigated TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:1499–1502CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Conteduca F, Iorio R, Mazza D, Caperna L, Bolle G, Argento G, Ferretti A (2012) Are MRI-based, patient matched cutting jigs as accurate as the tibial guides? Int Orthop 36:1589–1593CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Del Gaizo DJ, Della Valle CJ (2011) Instability in primary total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 34:e519–e521PubMed

12.

Engh GA, Petersen TL (1990) Comparative experience with intramedullary and extramedullary alignment in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 5:1–8CrossRefPubMed

13.

Hetaimish BM, Khan MM, Simunovic N, Al-Harbi HH, Bhandari M, Zalzal PK (2012) Meta-analysis of navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 27:1177–1182CrossRefPubMed

14.

Heyse TJ, Tibesku CO (2014) Improved femoral component rotation in TKA using patient-specific instrumentation. Knee 21:268–271CrossRefPubMed

15.

Hirschmann MT, Konala P, Amsler F, Iranpour F, Friederich NF, Cobb JP (2011) The position and orientation of total knee replacement components: a comparison of conventional radiographs, transverse 2D-CT slices and 3D-CT reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:629–633CrossRefPubMed

16.

Klatt BA, Goyal N, Austin MS, Hozack WJ (2008) Custom-fit total knee arthroplasty (OtisKnee) results in malalignment. J Arthroplasty 23:26–29CrossRefPubMed

17.

Koch PP, Müller D, Pisan M, Fucentese SF (2013) Radiographic accuracy in TKA with a CT-based patient-specific cutting block technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:2200–2205CrossRefPubMed

18.

Lombardi AV, Berend KR, Berend ME, Della Valle CJ, Engh GA, Fitz W, Hurst JM, Jinnah RH, Lonner JH, Macaulay WB, Repicci JA, Scuderi GR (2012) Current controversies in partial knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 61:347–381PubMed

19.

Lustig S, Fleury C, Goy D, Neyret P, Donell ST (2011) The accuracy of acquisition of an imageless computer-assisted system and its implication for knee arthroplasty. Knee 18:15–20CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lustig S, Scholes CJ, Oussedik SI, Kinzel V, Coolican MRJ, Parker DA (2013) Unsatisfactory accuracy as determined by computer navigation of VISIONAIRE patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 28:469–473CrossRefPubMed

21.

Michaut M, Beaufils P, Galaud B, Abadie P, Boisrenoult P, Fallet L (2008) Rotational alignment of femoral component with computed-assisted surgery (CAS) during total knee arthroplasty. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94:580–584CrossRefPubMed

22.

Miller MC, Berger RA, Petrella AJ, Karmas A, Rubash HE (2001) Optimizing femoral component rotation in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:38–45CrossRef

23.

Ng VY, DeClaire JH, Berend KR, Gulick BC, Lombardi AV (2012) Improved accuracy of alignment with patient-specific positioning guides compared with manual instrumentation in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:99–107CrossRefPubMed

24.

Novicoff WM, Saleh KJ, Mihalko WM, Wang X-Q, Knaebel H-P (2010) Primary total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of computer-assisted and manual techniques. Instr Course Lect 59:109–117PubMed

25.

Nunley RM, Ellison BS, Zhu J, Ruh EL, Howell SM, Barrack RL (2012) Do patient-specific guides improve coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:895–902CrossRefPubMed

26.

Olcott CW, Scott RD (1999) The ranawat award. Femoral component rotation during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 367:39–42CrossRef

27.

Parratte S, Blanc G, Boussemart T, Ollivier M, Le Corroller T, Argenson J-N (2013) Rotation in total knee arthroplasty: no difference between patient-specific and conventional instrumentation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:2213–2219CrossRefPubMed

28.

Pitto RP, Graydon AJ, Bradley L, Malak SF, Walker CG, Anderson IA (2006) Accuracy of a computer-assisted navigation system for total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(5):601–605CrossRefPubMed

29.

Roh YW, Kim TW, Lee S, Seong SC, Lee MC (2013) Is TKA using patient-specific instruments comparable to conventional TKA? A randomized controlled study of one system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3988–3995CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Scholes C, Sahni V, Lustig S, Parker DA, Coolican MRJ (2014) Patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty does not match the pre-operative plan as assessed by intra-operative computer-assisted navigation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:660–665CrossRefPubMed

31.

Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM (2002) Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:7–13CrossRef

32.

Spencer BA, Mont MA, McGrath MS, Boyd B, Mitrick MF (2009) Initial experience with custom-fit total knee replacement: intra-operative events and long-leg coronal alignment. Int Orthop 33:1571–1575CrossRefPubMed

33.

Thienpont E (2014) Letter to the editor Lustig et al entitled “unsatifactory accuracy as determined by computer navigation of visionaire patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty”. J Arthroplasty 29:247–248CrossRefPubMed

34.

Victor J, Van Doninck D, Labey L, Innocenti B, Parizel PM, Bellemans J (2009) How precise can bony landmarks be determined on a CT scan of the knee? Knee 16:358–365CrossRefPubMed

35.

Victor J, Dujardin J, Vandenneucker H, Arnout N, Bellemans J (2014) Patient-specific guides do not improve accuracy in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:263–271CrossRefPubMed

36.

Wiles A.D, Thompson D.G, Frantz D.D (2004). In:Proceedings of the SPIE 5367, medical imaging: visualization, image-guided procedures, and display, p. 421

37.

Woolson ST, Harris AHS, Wagner DW, Giori NJ (2014) Component alignment during total knee arthroplasty with use of standard or custom instrumentation: a randomized clinical trial using computed tomography for postoperative alignment measurement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96:366–372CrossRefPubMed

Title: Abnormal rate of intraoperative and postoperative implant positioning outliers using “MRI-based patient-specific” compared to “computer assisted” instrumentation in total knee replacement
Authors: M. Ollivier
Q. Tribot-Laspiere
J. Amzallag
P. Boisrenoult
N. Pujol
P. Beaufils
Publication date: 01-11-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 11/2016
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3645-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abnormal rate of intraoperative and postoperative implant positioning outliers using “MRI-based patient-specific” compared to “computer assisted” instrumentation in total knee replacement

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2016

Surgical accuracy in high tibial osteotomy: coronal equivalence of computer navigation and gap measurement

The role of bone void fillers in medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy: a systematic review

Usefulness of long tibial axis to measure medial tibial slope for opening wedge high tibial osteotomy

Clinical advantages of image-free navigation system using surface-based registration in anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Future perspective of CAS in orthopaedics

Navigation forces during wrist arthroscopy: assessment of expert levels