Literature DB >> 24042965

Patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty does not match the pre-operative plan as assessed by intra-operative computer-assisted navigation.

Corey Scholes1, Varun Sahni, Sebastien Lustig, David A Parker, Myles R J Coolican.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The introduction of patient-specific instruments (PSI) for guiding bone cuts could increase the incidence of malalignment in primary total knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to assess the agreement between one type of patient-specific instrumentation (Zimmer PSI) and the pre-operative plan with respect to bone cuts and component alignment during TKR using imageless computer navigation.
METHODS: A consecutive series of 30 femoral and tibial guides were assessed in-theatre by the same surgeon using computer navigation. Following surgical exposure, the PSI cutting guides were placed on the joint surface and alignment assessed using the navigation tracker. The difference between in-theatre data and the pre-operative plan was recorded and analysed.
RESULTS: The error between in-theatre measurements and pre-operative plan for the femoral and tibial components exceeded 3° for 3 and 17% of the sample, respectively, while the error for total coronal alignment exceeded 3° for 27% of the sample.
CONCLUSION: The present results indicate that alignment with Zimmer PSI cutting blocks, assessed by imageless navigation, does not match the pre-operative plan in a proportion of cases. To prevent unnecessary increases in the incidence of malalignment in primary TKR, it is recommended that these devices should not be used without objective verification of alignment, either in real-time or with post-operative imaging. Further work is required to identify the source of discrepancies and validate these devices prior to routine use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24042965     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2670-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  23 in total

1.  Intraoperative computer navigation parameters are poor predictors of function 1 year after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Benjamin J Widmer; Corey J Scholes; Sébastien Lustig; Leonard Conrad; Sam I Oussedik; David A Parker
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Custom-fit total knee arthroplasty (OtisKnee) results in malalignment.

Authors:  Brian A Klatt; Nitin Goyal; Matthew S Austin; William J Hozack
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  How precise can bony landmarks be determined on a CT scan of the knee?

Authors:  J Victor; D Van Doninck; L Labey; B Innocenti; P M Parizel; J Bellemans
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2009-02-05       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  The accuracy of acquisition of an imageless computer-assisted system and its implication for knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  S Lustig; C Fleury; D Goy; P Neyret; S T Donell
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2010-01-12       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 5.  Malalignment: forewarned is forearmed.

Authors:  David Fang; Merrill A Ritter
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.390

6.  The effect of pelvic movement on the accuracy of hip centre location acquired using an imageless navigation system.

Authors:  Sebastien Lustig; Cyrille Fleury; Elvire Servien; Guillaume Demey; Philippe Neyret; Simon T Donell
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Evaluation of the accuracy of a patient-specific instrumentation by navigation.

Authors:  Fabio Conteduca; Raffaele Iorio; Daniele Mazza; Ludovico Caperna; Gabriele Bolle; Giuseppe Argento; Andrea Ferretti
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Do patient-specific guides improve coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty?

Authors:  Ryan M Nunley; Bradley S Ellison; Jinjun Zhu; Erin L Ruh; Stephen M Howell; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Improved accuracy of alignment with patient-specific positioning guides compared with manual instrumentation in TKA.

Authors:  Vincent Y Ng; Jeffrey H DeClaire; Keith R Berend; Bethany C Gulick; Adolph V Lombardi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  The value of patient-matched instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  John W Noble; Chris A Moore; Ning Liu
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  26 in total

1.  Assessing the accuracy of patient-specific guides for total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jong-Keun Seon; Hyeong-Won Park; Seung-Hyun Yoo; Eun-Kyoo Song
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Assessment of patient-specific instrumentation precision through bone resection measurements.

Authors:  F Zambianchi; A Colombelli; V Digennaro; A Marcovigi; R Mugnai; F Fiacchi; D Sandoni; A Belluati; F Catani
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  No difference in mechanical alignment and femoral component placement between patient-specific instrumentation and conventional instrumentation in TKA.

Authors:  Huichao Fu; Jiaxing Wang; Shenyuan Zhou; Tao Cheng; Wen Zhang; Qi Wang; Xianlong Zhang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Evaluation of the accuracy of resected bone thickness based on patient-specific instrumentation during total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kazumasa Yamamura; Fumiaki Inori; Sadahiko Konishi
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-02-06       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  Case-related factors affecting cutting errors of the proximal tibia in total knee arthroplasty assessed by computer navigation.

Authors:  Tadashi Tsukeoka; Yoshikazu Tsuneizumi; Kensuke Yoshino; Mashiko Suzuki
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-12-22       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  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
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Comparison between cylindrical axis-reference and articular surface-reference femoral bone cut for total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Yasuo Niki; Katsuya Nagai; Tomoki Sassa; Kengo Harato; Yasunori Suda
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  The accuracy of bony resection from patient-specific guides during total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Yadin D Levy; Vincent V G An; Christopher J W Shean; Floris R Groen; Peter M Walker; Warwick J M Bruce
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 9.  Concepts and techniques of a new robotically assisted technique for total knee arthroplasty: the ROSA knee system.

Authors:  Cécile Batailler; Didier Hannouche; Francesco Benazzo; Sébastien Parratte
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 3.067

10.  Computerized tomography based "patient specific blocks" improve postoperative mechanical alignment in primary total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Raju Vaishya; Vipul Vijay; Vikas P Birla; Amit K Agarwal
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2016-07-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.