Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2022; 35(09): 978-982
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1721127
Original Article

Prosthetic Accuracy Depends on the Design of Patient-Specific Instrumentation: Results of a Retrospective Study Using Three-Dimensional Imaging

Kazumasa Yamamura 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka General Hospital of West Japan Railway Company, Abeno-ku, Osaka, Japan
,
Fumiaki Inori
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka General Hospital of West Japan Railway Company, Abeno-ku, Osaka, Japan
,
Sadahiko Konishi
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka General Hospital of West Japan Railway Company, Abeno-ku, Osaka, Japan
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

To determine accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI), the preoperative three-dimensional (3D) plan should be superimposed on the postoperative 3D image to compare prosthetic alignment. We aimed to compare prosthetic alignment on a preoperative 3D computed tomography (CT) plan and postoperative 3D-CT image, and evaluate the accuracy of PSI during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Thirty consecutive knees (30 patients) who underwent TKA using PSI were retrospectively evaluated. The preoperative plan was prepared using 3D CT acquisitions of the hip, knee, and ankle joints. The postoperative 3D CT image obtained 1 week after surgery was superimposed onto the preoperative 3D plan using computer software. Differences in prosthetic alignment between the preoperative and postoperative images were measured using six parameters: coronal, sagittal, and axial alignments of femoral and tibial prostheses. Differences in prosthetic alignment greater than 3 degrees were considered outliers. Two observers performed all measurements. All parameters were repeatedly measured over a 4-week interval. This measurement method's intraobserver and interobserver reliabilities were more than 0.81 (very good). For the femoral and tibial prostheses, absolute differences between the preoperative and postoperative 3D CT images were significantly larger in the sagittal than in the coronal and axial planes (p < 0.001). The outlier rate for the sagittal alignment of femoral and tibial prostheses was significantly higher than that for the alignment of coronal and axial planes (p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the range of motion (ROM) before and after TKA when comparing cases with and without outliers in the sagittal plane. Even though the present study did not reveal any issues with the ROM that depended on the presence of an outlier, accurate verification of prosthetic alignment for individual PSI models may be necessary because the designs, referenced images, and accuracy are different in each model.

Keywords

total knee arthroplasty - patient specific instrumentation - three-dimensional evaluation - computed tomography

Note

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


Authors' Contributions

Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by K. Y., F. I., and S. K. The first draft of the manuscript was written by K. Y. and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript. All authors contributed to the study conception and design.




Publication History

Received: 18 March 2020

Accepted: 17 October 2020

Article published online:
25 November 2020

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Fang DM, Ritter MA, Davis KE. Coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty: just how important is it?. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (6, Suppl): 39-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Liu HX, Shang P, Ying XZ, Zhang Y. Shorter survival rate in varus-aligned knees after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (08) 2663-2671
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lombardi Jr AV, Berend KR, Ng VY. Neutral mechanical alignment: a requirement for successful TKA: affirms. Orthopedics 2011; 34 (09) e504-e506
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Hafez MA, Chelule KL, Seedhom BB, Sherman KP. Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty using patient-specific templating. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 444 (444) 184-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Howell SM, Kuznik K, Hull ML, Siston RA. Results of an initial experience with custom-fit positioning total knee arthroplasty in a series of 48 patients. Orthopedics 2008; 31 (09) 857-863
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Thienpont E, Schwab PE, Fennema P. Efficacy of patient-specific instruments in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (06) 521-530
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Stirling P, Valsalan Mannambeth R, Soler A, Batta V, Malhotra RK, Kalairajah Y. Computerised tomography vs magnetic resonance imaging for modeling of patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. World J Orthop 2015; 6 (02) 290-297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Boonen B, Schotanus MG, Kerens B, van der Weegen W, van Drumpt RA, Kort NP. Intra-operative results and radiological outcome of conventional and patient-specific surgery in total knee arthroplasty: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (10) 2206-2212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Boonen B, Schotanus MG, Kort NP. Preliminary experience with the patient-specific templating total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2012; 83 (04) 387-393
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Leeuwen JA, Grøgaard B, Nordsletten L, Röhrl SM. Comparison of planned and achieved implant position in total knee arthroplasty with patient-specific positioning guides. Acta Orthop 2015; 86 (02) 201-207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Marimuthu K, Chen DB, Harris IA, Wheatley E, Bryant CJ, MacDessi SJ. A multi-planar CT-based comparative analysis of patient-specific cutting guides with conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (06) 1138-1142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lee YS, Lee BK, Lee SH, Park HG, Jun DS, Moon DH. Effect of foot rotation on the mechanical axis and correlation between knee and whole leg radiographs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (11) 2542-2547
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Okamoto S, Mizu-uchi H, Okazaki K. et al. Two-dimensional planning can result in internal rotation of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (01) 229-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hirschmann MT, Konala P, Amsler F, Iranpour F, Friederich NF, Cobb JP. 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 2011; 93 (05) 629-633
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Yamamura K, Minoda Y, Mizokawa S. et al. Novel alignment measurement technique for total knee arthroplasty using patient specific instrumentation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137 (03) 401-407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Jiang J, Kang X, Lin Q. et al. Accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation compared with conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2015; 38 (04) e305-e313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33 (01) 159-174
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Walter SD, Eliasziw M, Donner A. Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med 1998; 17 (01) 101-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant 2013; 48 (03) 452-458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kwon OR, Kang KT, Son J, Suh DS, Heo DB, Koh YG. Patient-specific instrumentation development in TKA: 1st and 2nd generation designs in comparison with conventional instrumentation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137 (01) 111-118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Silva A, Sampaio R, Pinto E. Patient-specific instrumentation improves tibial component rotation in TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (03) 636-642
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Abdel MP, Parratte S, Blanc G. et al. No benefit of patient-specific instrumentation in TKA on functional and gait outcomes: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (08) 2468-2476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Maus U, Marques CJ, Scheunemann D. et al. No improvement in reducing outliers in coronal axis alignment with patient-specific instrumentation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (09) 2788-2796
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Seon JK, Park HW, Yoo SH, Song EK. Assessing the accuracy of patient-specific guides for total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (11) 3678-3683
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Yamamura K, Minoda Y, Sugama R. et al. Design improvement in patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty improved the accuracy of the tibial prosthetic alignment in the coronal and axial planes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020; 28 (05) 1560-1567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Anderl W, Pauzenberger L, Kölblinger R. et al. Patient-specific instrumentation improved mechanical alignment, while early clinical outcome was comparable to conventional instrumentation in TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (01) 102-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar