Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 12/2017

01-12-2017 | Knee

Patient-specific instruments for total knee arthroplasty can accurately predict the component size as used peroperative

Authors: Martijn G. M. Schotanus, Daphne A. L. Schoenmakers, Rob Sollie, Nanne P. Kort

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 12/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Patients-specific instruments (PSI) for implantation of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be used to predict the implant size for both the femur and the tibia component. This study aims to determine the impact of approval of the PSI planning for TKA on the frequency of, and reason for intraoperative changes of implant sizes.

Methods

The clinical records of 293 patients operated with MRI- (90.4 %) and CT-based (9.6 %) PSI were reviewed for actual used implant size. Preoperative default planning from the technician and approved planning by the operating surgeon were compared with the intraoperative implanted component size for both the femur and tibia. Intraoperative reason for not following the default sizes was outdated. Furthermore, MRI- and CT-based PSI were compared for these outcomes.

Results

In 93.9 and 91.1 % for, respectively, the femur and tibia (n.s.), the surgeon planned size was implanted during surgery. The predicted size of the femur (p < 0.00) and the tibia (p < 0.00) component planned by a technician differed from the implanted component sizes in 62 (21.2 %) and 51 (17.4 %) patients, respectively. In 17 cases, the femoral component size was adapted intraoperative based on the expert opinion of the operating surgeon. In 26 cases, the tibia component was changed during the surgery because of a mediolateral overhang, sclerotic bone, medial or lateral release, limited extension and/or fixed varus deformity. The results between the MRI- and CT-based PSI did not differ (n.s.).

Conclusions

PSI is a tool to help the surgeon to achieve the best possible results during TKA. The planning made by a technician should always be validated and approved by the operating surgeon who has the ultimate responsibility regarding the operation. With PSI, the operating surgeon is able to minimize intraoperative implant size errors in advance to improve operating room efficiency with possible lowering hospital costs per procedure.

Levels of evidence

III.
Literature
1.
Barrack RL, Ruh EL, Williams BM et al (2012) Patient specific cutting blocks are currently of no proven value. J Bone Joint Surg 94(Suppl A):95–99CrossRef
2.
Boonen B, Schotanus MG, Kort NP (2012) Preliminary experience with the patient-specific templating total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 83(4):387–393CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Boonen B, Schotanus MG, Kerens B et al (2013) Intra-operative results and radiological outcome of conventional and patient-specific surgery in total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter randomised controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(10):2206–2212CrossRefPubMed
4.
Boonen B, Schrander DE, Schotanus MGM et al (2015) Patient Specific Guides in total Knee Arthroplasty: A two year Follow up of the first two hundred consecutive cases performed By a single Surgeon. JCRMM (1):1–10
5.
Del Gaizo D, Soileau ES, Lachiewicz PF (2009) Value of preoperative templating for primary total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 22(4):284–293CrossRefPubMed
6.
Hamilton WG, Parks NL, Saxena A (2013) Patient-specific instrumentation does not shorten surgical time: a prospective, randomized trial. J Arthroplasty 28(8 Suppl):96–100CrossRefPubMed
7.
Hsu AR, Kim JD, Bhatia S, Levine BR (2012) Effect of training level on accuracy of digital templating in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 35(2):e179–e183PubMed
8.
Issa K, Rifai A, McGrath MS et al (2013) Reliability of templating with patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 26:429–434CrossRefPubMed
9.
Kniesel B, Konstantinidis L, Hirschmüller A et al (2014) Digital templating in total knee and hip replacement: an analysis of planning accuracy. Int Orthop 38(4):733–739CrossRefPubMed
10.
Levine B, Fabi D, Deirmengian C (2010) Digital templating in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 33(11):797PubMed
11.
Lorio R, Siegel J, Specht LM et al (2009) A comparison of acetate vs digital templating for preoperative planning of total hip arthroplasty: is digital templating accurate and safe? J Arthroplasty 24(2):175–179CrossRef
12.
Miller AG, Purtill JJ (2012) Accuracy of digital templating in total knee arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 41(11):510–512
13.
Nunley RM, Ellison BS, Ruh EL et al (2012) Are patient-specific cutting blocks cost-effective for total knee arthroplasty? Orthop Relat Res 470(3):889–894CrossRef
14.
Pietsch M, Djahani O, Hochegger M et al (2013) Patient-specific total knee arthroplasty: the importance of planning by the surgeon. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(10):2220–2226CrossRefPubMed
15.
Rubin LE, Murgo KT (2013) Brief report: total knee arthroplasty performed with patient-specific, pre-operative CT-guided navigation. R I Med J 96(3):34–37
16.
Sassoon A, Nam D, Nunley R, Barrack R (2015) Systematic review of patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: new but not improved. Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:151–158CrossRefPubMed
17.
Schotanus MGM, Sollie R, van Haaren EH et al (2016) Radiological discrepancy between MRI- and CT-based patient-specific matched guides for total knee arthroplasty from the same manufacturer: a randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint J 98-B(6):786–792CrossRefPubMed
18.
Specht LM, Levitz S, Iorio R et al (2007) A comparison of acetate and digital templating for total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 464:179–183PubMed
19.
Stronach BM, Pelt CE, Erickson J, Peters CL (2013) Patient-specific total knee arthroplasty required frequent surgeon-directed changes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(1):169–174CrossRefPubMed
20.
Thienpont E, Schwab PE, Fennema P (2014) A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-specific instrumentation for improving alignment of the components in total knee replacement. Bone Joint J 96-B(8):1052–1061CrossRefPubMed
21.
White D, Chelule KL, Seedhom BB (2008) Accuracy of MRI vs CT imaging with particular reference to patient specific templates for total knee replacement surgery. Int J Med Robot 4(3):224–231CrossRefPubMed
22.
Winder J, Bibb R (2005) Medical rapid prototyping technologies: state of the art and current limitations for application in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 63:1006–1015CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Patient-specific instruments for total knee arthroplasty can accurately predict the component size as used peroperative
Authors
Martijn G. M. Schotanus
Daphne A. L. Schoenmakers
Rob Sollie
Nanne P. Kort
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 12/2017
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4345-1

Other articles of this Issue 12/2017

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 12/2017 Go to the issue

Knee

Sports-specific differences in postsurgical infections after arthroscopically assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Knee

Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is superior to single-bundle reconstruction in terms of revision frequency: a study of 22,460 patients from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register

Knee

Femoral footprint of the popliteus tendon may be at the risk of damage during total knee arthroplasty

Erratum

Erratum to: The challenge of treating complex knee instability

Letter to the Editor

Conceptual and methodological considerations in the assessment of the neuromuscular function by means of tensiomyography

Knee

Arthrofibrosis after ACL reconstruction is best treated in a step-wise approach with early recognition and intervention: a systematic review