Jong-Keun Seon1, Hyeong-Won Park2, Seung-Hyun Yoo1, Eun-Kyoo Song1. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Center for Joint Disease, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, 322 Seoyang-ro, Hwasun-eup, Hwasun-gun, Jeonnam, 519-763, South Korea. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Center for Joint Disease, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, 322 Seoyang-ro, Hwasun-eup, Hwasun-gun, Jeonnam, 519-763, South Korea. 77littlebig@hanmail.net.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patient-specific guides have been introduced recently as a means of making accurate bone cuts through custom cutting blocks constructed based on pre-operative three-dimensional imaging. However, the controversy concerning the improved results of patient-specific guides have not been resolved yet; in addition, there have been no studies to investigate the causes of variable with inconsistent results and solutions for the causes. METHODS: Thirty eight patients (38 knees) underwent total knee arthroplasty with patient-specific guides. The mean age of the patients was 68 years (SD ± 6.3), and all patients had a minimum 2-year follow-up. An intra-operative alignment using navigation and the causes of outliers were evaluated. RESULTS: An average coronal alignment of PSI jigs was 0.5° (SD ± 0.9°) in femur and 0.1° (SD ± 0.8°) in tibia, and the number of outliers was two and three cases, respectively. An average sagittal alignment was 0.6° (SD ± 0.9°) in femur and 5.5° (SD ± 1.1°) in tibia, and the number of outliers was three and five cases, respectively. All outliers resulted from large osteophytes near the contact point of patient-specific guides which disturb sitting of the guide. CONCLUSION: It was suggested that patient-specific guides were an effective and safe method to achieve accurate alignments, with no additional intra-operative complication. It is important to note that surgeons need to be precautious using the patient-specific instrumentation in patients with severe varus deformity. In addition, existing osteophytes which disturb sitting of the guides should be carefully evaluated pre-operatively and intra-operatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
PURPOSE:Patient-specific guides have been introduced recently as a means of making accurate bone cuts through custom cutting blocks constructed based on pre-operative three-dimensional imaging. However, the controversy concerning the improved results of patient-specific guides have not been resolved yet; in addition, there have been no studies to investigate the causes of variable with inconsistent results and solutions for the causes. METHODS: Thirty eight patients (38 knees) underwent total knee arthroplasty with patient-specific guides. The mean age of the patients was 68 years (SD ± 6.3), and all patients had a minimum 2-year follow-up. An intra-operative alignment using navigation and the causes of outliers were evaluated. RESULTS: An average coronal alignment of PSI jigs was 0.5° (SD ± 0.9°) in femur and 0.1° (SD ± 0.8°) in tibia, and the number of outliers was two and three cases, respectively. An average sagittal alignment was 0.6° (SD ± 0.9°) in femur and 5.5° (SD ± 1.1°) in tibia, and the number of outliers was three and five cases, respectively. All outliers resulted from large osteophytes near the contact point of patient-specific guides which disturb sitting of the guide. CONCLUSION: It was suggested that patient-specific guides were an effective and safe method to achieve accurate alignments, with no additional intra-operative complication. It is important to note that surgeons need to be precautious using the patient-specific instrumentation in patients with severe varus deformity. In addition, existing osteophytes which disturb sitting of the guides should be carefully evaluated pre-operatively and intra-operatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Entities:
Keywords:
Navigation; Outlier; Patient-specific guides; Total knee arthroplasty; Verification
Authors: R G Marx; P Grimm; K A Lillemoe; C M Robertson; O R Ayeni; S Lyman; E A Bogner; H Pavlov Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2011-03-23 Impact factor: 4.342
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
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
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
Authors: Valeria Vendries; Tamas Ungi; Jordan Harry; Manuela Kunz; Jana Podlipská; Les MacKenzie; Gabriel Venne Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2021-07-27 Impact factor: 2.924