Literature DB >> 28032697

Patient-Specific Orthopaedic Implants.

Jack M Haglin1, Adam E M Eltorai2, Joseph A Gil3,2, Stephen E Marcaccio2, Juliana Botero-Hincapie4, Alan H Daniels3,2.   

Abstract

Patient-specific orthopaedic implants are emerging as a clinically promising treatment option for a growing number of conditions to better match an individual's anatomy. Patient-specific implant (PSI) technology aims to reduce overall procedural costs, minimize surgical time, and maximize patient outcomes by achieving better biomechanical implant fit. With this commercially-available technology, computed tomography or magnetic resonance images can be used in conjunction with specialized computer programs to create preoperative patient-specific surgical plans and to develop custom cutting guides from 3-D reconstructed images of patient anatomy. Surgeons can then place these temporary guides or "jigs" during the procedure, allowing them to better recreate the exact resections of the computer-generated surgical plan. Over the past decade, patient-specific implants have seen increased use in orthopaedics and they have been widely indicated in total knee arthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty, and corrective osteotomies. Patient-specific implants have also been explored for use in total shoulder arthroplasty and spinal surgery. Despite their increasing popularity, significant support for PSI use in orthopaedics has been lacking in the literature and it is currently uncertain whether the theoretical biomechanical advantages of patient-specific orthopaedic implants carry true advantages in surgical outcomes when compared to standard procedures. The purpose of this review was to assess the current status of patient-specific orthopaedic implants, to explore their future direction, and to summarize any comparative published studies that measure definitive surgical characteristics of patient-specific orthopaedic implant use such as patient outcomes, biomechanical implant alignment, surgical cost, patient blood loss, or patient recovery.
© 2016 Chinese Orthopaedic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  zzm321990Custom implants; zzm321990Orthopaedic surgery; zzm321990Patient-specific implants

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28032697      PMCID: PMC6584361          DOI: 10.1111/os.12282

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthop Surg        ISSN: 1757-7853            Impact factor:   2.071


  12 in total

1.  Custom-designed orthopedic plates using semantic parameters and template.

Authors:  He Kunjin; Zhang Xiang; Zhang Yuxue
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2018-11-03       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 2.  Systematic review of 3D printing in spinal surgery: the current state of play.

Authors:  Ben Wilcox; Ralph J Mobbs; Ai-Min Wu; Kevin Phan
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-09

3.  Extra-articular distal tibia fractures-controversies regarding treatment options. A single-centre prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Mihail-Lazar Mioc; Radu Prejbeanu; Bogdan Deleanu; Bogdan Anglitoiu; Horia Haragus; Marius Niculescu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Double level knee osteotomy using patient-specific cutting guides is accurate and provides satisfactory clinical results: a prospective analysis of a cohort of twenty-two continuous patients.

Authors:  Francesco Grasso; Pierre Martz; Grégoire Micicoi; Raghbir Khakha; Kristian Kley; Lukas Hanak; Matthieu Ollivier; Christophe Jacquet
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-09-18       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Custom Implants in TKA Provide No Substantial Benefit in Terms of Outcome Scores, Reoperation Risk, or Mean Alignment: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Eran Beit Ner; Saad Dosani; Leela C Biant; Gwenllian Fflur Tawy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 4.755

Review 6.  Evolution of drug-eluting biomedical implants for sustained drug delivery.

Authors:  Juliana C Quarterman; Sean M Geary; Aliasger K Salem
Journal:  Eur J Pharm Biopharm       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 5.589

7.  Quality-Adjusted Life Years After Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: Health-Related Quality of Life After 12,782 Joint Replacements.

Authors:  Joseph F Konopka; Yuo-Yu Lee; Edwin P Su; Alexander S McLawhorn
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2018-08-15

Review 8.  Biomechanical and Clinical Effect of Patient-Specific or Customized Knee Implants: A Review.

Authors:  Jin-Ah Lee; Yong-Gon Koh; Kyoung-Tak Kang
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 4.241

9.  Are There Differences in Accuracy or Outcomes Scores Among Navigated, Robotic, Patient-specific Instruments or Standard Cutting Guides in TKA? A Network Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Pierre-Alban Bouché; Simon Corsia; Agnès Dechartres; Matthieu Resche-Rigon; Rémy Nizard
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 4.755

10.  Integration of Three-dimensional Technologies in Orthopedics: A Tool for Preoperative Planning of Tibial Plateau Fractures.

Authors:  Flaviu Moldovan; Adrian Gligor; Tiberiu Bataga
Journal:  Acta Inform Med       Date:  2020-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.