Literature DB >> 24435223

Improved positioning of the tibial component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with patient-specific cutting blocks.

M L Dao Trong1, C Diezi, G Goerres, N Helmy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has recently regained popularity for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. Numerous authors have cited alignment as an important prognostic factor in the survival of UKA. Limb alignment affects not only the longevity of UKA by influencing wear of polyethylene, but also affects the unreplaced contralateral compartment. Malpositioning of the components may result in unequal wear patterns, thus further leading to early failure and additionally influencing clinical outcome as well. However, there is a lack of techniques to assure a high accuracy of the implant positioning.
METHODS: In this study, we investigated tibia component alignment of 28 medial UKAs implanted with patient-specific cutting blocks. Three patients were excluded due to bad imaging. Measurements of tibial component alignment from postoperatively computed tomography (CT) scans were compared to respective CT-based preoperative plannings to assess the accuracy of implant positioning.
RESULTS: Our results show excellent high accuracy of tibial implant position in tibial varus/valgus (Δ 0.3° ± 1.7°), posterior slope (Δ 1.1° ± 2.6°) and external rotation (Δ 1.5° ± 3.3°).
CONCLUSION: We conclude that patient-specific cutting blocks improve the accuracy of tibia component positioning in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case series with no comparison group, Level IV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24435223     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-2839-2

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


  22 in total

1.  Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Philippe Hernigou; Gerard Deschamps
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Accuracy of dynamic tactile-guided unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Nicholas J Dunbar; Martin W Roche; Brian H Park; Sharon H Branch; Michael A Conditt; Scott A Banks
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty relieves pain and improves function more than total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Manish S Noticewala; Jeffrey A Geller; Jonathan H Lee; William Macaulay
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system.

Authors:  J Cobb; J Henckel; P Gomes; S Harris; M Jakopec; F Rodriguez; A Barrett; B Davies
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2006-02

5.  Evaluation of implant position and knee alignment after patient-specific unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Franz Xaver Koeck; Johannes Beckmann; Christian Luring; Bjoern Rath; Joachim Grifka; Erhan Basad
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Multiparameter quantitative computer-assisted tomography assessment of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties.

Authors:  David G Campbell; Luke J Johnson; Simon C West
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.872

7.  The John Insall Award: unicompartmental knee replacement: a minimum twenty-one-year followup, end-result study.

Authors:  Michael R O'Rourke; Jeremy J Gardner; John J Callaghan; Steve S Liu; Devon D Goetz; David A Vittetoe; Patrick M Sullivan; Richard C Johnston
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Unsatisfactory accuracy as determined by computer navigation of VISIONAIRE patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Sébastien Lustig; Corey J Scholes; Sam I Oussedik; Vera Kinzel; Myles R J Coolican; David A Parker
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2012-11-12       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  Radiographic accuracy in TKA with a CT-based patient-specific cutting block technique.

Authors:  P P Koch; D Müller; M Pisan; S F Fucentese
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Deviation between navigated and final 3-dimensional implant position in mini-invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a pilot study in 13 patients.

Authors:  Nicolas Martinez-Carranza; Lars Weidenhielm; Joakim Crafoord; Margareta Hedström
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2012-10-08       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  13 in total

1.  Patient-specific instrumentation improves alignment of lateral unicompartmental knee replacements by novice surgeons.

Authors:  Chin Ting Justin Ng; Simon Newman; Simon Harris; Susannah Clarke; Justin Cobb
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-05-13       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  A modified technique to reduce tibial keel cutting errors during an Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hiroshi Inui; Shuji Taketomi; Keitarou Tahara; Ryota Yamagami; Takaki Sanada; Sakae Tanaka
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-05-02       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Do modern total knee replacements improve tibial coverage?

Authors:  Malin Meier; Jonathan Webb; Jamie E Collins; Johannes Beckmann; Wolfgang Fitz
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Comparison of implant position and joint awareness between fixed- and mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a minimum of five year follow-up study.

Authors:  Man Soo Kim; In Jun Koh; Chul Kyu Kim; Keun Young Choi; Jong Won Baek; Yong In
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Patient-specific instrumentation in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is reliable and accurate except for the tibial rotation.

Authors:  B Kerens; A M Leenders; M G M Schotanus; B Boonen; W E Tuinebreijer; P J Emans; B Jong; N P Kort
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is effective: ten year results.

Authors:  Michele Vasso; Chiara Del Regno; Carlo Perisano; Antonio D'Amelio; Katia Corona; Alfredo Schiavone Panni
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  The John Insall Award: No Functional Benefit After Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Performed With Patient-specific Instrumentation: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Matthieu Ollivier; Sebastien Parratte; Alexandre Lunebourg; Elke Viehweger; Jean-Noel Argenson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  [Analysis of the influence of tibial component posterior slope angle on short- and mid-term effectiveness of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty].

Authors:  Yingbin Wu; Weijie Lu; Zhichen Li; Huifeng Xie; Lin Tang; Enhao Pan
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2022-02-15

9.  Patient-specific positioning guides do not consistently achieve the planned implant position in UKA.

Authors:  Justin A M J van Leeuwen; Stephan M Röhrl
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  A high rate of tibial plateau fractures after early experience with patient-specific instrumentation for unicompartmental knee arthroplasties.

Authors:  A M Leenders; M G M Schotanus; R J P Wind; R A P Borghans; N P Kort
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-04-30       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.