Surgical Accuracy of an Early Intervention Knee Implant Instrumentation System

Abstract

Accuracy of component and limb alignment are critical parameters for the long-term success of unicompartmental knee implants. In this study, we performed a laboratory evaluation of an instrumentation system which was designed for an early intervention (EI) type of unicompartmental knee. The accuracy of fit was evaluated by implanting in 20 sawbones full leg models. The overall alignment of the limb was compared pre- and postoperatively. The accuracy of placement of each component on its bone was measured. The mean overall alignment angle in the frontal plane was within 1° of target with less than 1° standard deviation. The components were positioned in frontal and sagittal planes with maximum errors of 2°. The angular accuracy was better than in studies reported in the literature for manual instruments, and almost approached the accuracy of computer-assisted systems. The position of the femoral component in the recess was within 1 mm in most cases but the sagittal flexion angle was variable with a standard deviation of 6°. Evaluation of a surgical technique in this way was a valuable method for determining accuracy and for highlighting any deficiencies in the system which could then be corrected.

Keywords

early intervention knee - unicompartmental knee - knee alignment - surgical technique for knee implants - accuracy of surgical technique

• References

• 1 Riff AJ, Sah AP, Della Valle CJ. Outcomes and complications of unicondylar arthroplasty. Clin Sports Med 2014; 33 (01) 149-160
• 2 Chaudhary ME, Walker PS. Analysis of an early intervention tibial component for medial osteoarthritis. J Biomech Eng 2014; 136 (06) 061008
• 3 Arno S, Walker PS, Bell CP. , et al. Relation between cartilage volume and meniscal contact in medial osteoarthritis of the knee. Knee 2012; 19 (06) 896-901
• 4 Minns RJ, Day JB, Hardinge K. Kinesiologic and biomechanical assessment of the Charnley Load Angle Inlay knee prosthesis. Eng Med 1982; (11) 25-32
• 5 Chan HY, Walker PS, Lerner A, Chaudhary ME, Bosco JA. Design of reverse materials resurfacing implants for mild-moderate medial osteoarthritis of the knee. J Med Device 2017; 11: 1-7
• 6 Jenny JY, Boeri C. Accuracy of implantation of a unicompartmental total knee arthroplasty with 2 different instrumentations: a case-controlled comparative study. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17 (08) 1016-1020
• 7 Rosenberger RE, Fink C, Quirbach S, Attal R, Tecklenburg K, Hoser C. The immediate effect of navigation on implant accuracy in primary mini-invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008; 16 (12) 1133-1140
• 8 Jung KA, Kim SJ, Lee SC, Hwang SH, Ahn NK. Accuracy of implantation during computer-assisted minimally invasive Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison with a conventional instrumented technique. Knee 2010; 17 (06) 387-391
• 9 Mofidi A, Plate JF, Lu B. , et al. Assessment of accuracy of robotically assisted unicompartmental arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (08) 1918-1925
• 10 Allen MM, Pagnano MW. Controversies in knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint 2016; 98: 81-83
• 11 Garvin KL, Barrera A, Mahoney CR, Hartman CW, Haider H. Total knee arthroplasty with a computer-navigated saw: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (01) 155-161
• 12 Macdonald W, Styf J, Carlsson LV, Jacobsson CM. Improved tibial cutting accuracy in knee arthroplasty. Med Eng Phys 2004; 26 (09) 807-812
• 13 Jaramaz B, Nikou C. Precision freehand sculpting for unicondylar knee replacement: design and experimental validation. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2012; 57 (04) 293-299
• 14 Lonner JH, Smith JR, Picard F, Hamlin B, Rowe PJ, Riches PE. High degree of accuracy of a novel image-free handheld robot for unicondylar knee arthroplasty in a cadaveric study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (01) 206-212
• 15 Noble PC, Conditt M. Computer-based training methods for surgical procedures. US patent EP1501406A2. 2005
• 16 Holme TJ, Henckel J, Hartshorn K, Cobb JP, Hart AJ. Computed tomography scanogram compared to long leg radiograph for determining axial knee alignment. Acta Orthop 2015; 86 (04) 440-443
• 17 Chen JY, Yeo SJ, Yew AK. , et al. The radiological outcomes of patient-specific instrumentation versus conventional total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (03) 630-635
• 18 Manjunath KS, Gopalakrishna KG, Vineeth G. Evaluation of alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2015; 25 (05) 895-903
• 19 Victor J, Hoste D. Image-based computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty leads to lower variability in coronal alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (428) 131-139
• 20 Nunley RM, Nam D, Johnson SR, Barnes CL. Extreme variability in posterior slope of the proximal tibia: measurements on 2395 CT scans of patients undergoing UKA?. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (08) 1677-1680
• 21 Schlatterer B, Suedhoff I, Bonnet X, Catonne Y, Maestro M, Skalli W. Skeletal landmarks for TKR implantations: evaluation of their accuracy using EOS imaging acquisition system. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2009; 95 (01) 2-11