Cargando…
The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study
PURPOSE: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been proposed as a means of improving surgical accuracy and ease of implantation during technically challenging procedures such as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The purpose of this prospective randomised controlled trial was to compare...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5966491/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28831554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4677-5 |
_version_ | 1783325470057562112 |
---|---|
author | Alvand, Abtin Khan, Tanvir Jenkins, Cathy Rees, Jonathan L. Jackson, William F. Dodd, Christopher A. F. Murray, David W. Price, Andrew J. |
author_facet | Alvand, Abtin Khan, Tanvir Jenkins, Cathy Rees, Jonathan L. Jackson, William F. Dodd, Christopher A. F. Murray, David W. Price, Andrew J. |
author_sort | Alvand, Abtin |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been proposed as a means of improving surgical accuracy and ease of implantation during technically challenging procedures such as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The purpose of this prospective randomised controlled trial was to compare the accuracy of implantation and functional outcome of mobile-bearing medial UKAs implanted with and without PSI by experienced UKA surgeons. METHODS: Mobile-bearing medial UKAs were implanted in 43 patients using either PSI guides or conventional instrumentation. Intra-operative measurements, meniscal bearing size implanted, and post-operative radiographic analyses were performed to assess component positioning. Functional outcome was determined using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). RESULTS: PSI guides could not be used in three cases due to concerns regarding accuracy and registration onto native anatomy, particularly on the tibial side. In general, similar component alignment and positioning was achieved using the two systems (n.s. for coronal/sagittal alignment and tibial coverage). The PSI group had greater tibial slope (p = 0.029). The control group had a higher number of optimum size meniscal bearing inserted (95 vs 52%; p = 0.001). There were no differences in OKS improvements (n.s). CONCLUSION: Component positioning for the two groups was similar for the femur but less accurate on the tibial side using PSI, often with some unnecessarily deep resections of the tibial plateau. Although PSI was comparable to conventional instrumentation based on OKS improvements at 12 months, we continue to use conventional instrumentation for UKA at our institution until further improvements to the PSI guides can be demonstrated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level I. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5966491 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59664912018-06-04 The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study Alvand, Abtin Khan, Tanvir Jenkins, Cathy Rees, Jonathan L. Jackson, William F. Dodd, Christopher A. F. Murray, David W. Price, Andrew J. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Knee PURPOSE: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been proposed as a means of improving surgical accuracy and ease of implantation during technically challenging procedures such as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The purpose of this prospective randomised controlled trial was to compare the accuracy of implantation and functional outcome of mobile-bearing medial UKAs implanted with and without PSI by experienced UKA surgeons. METHODS: Mobile-bearing medial UKAs were implanted in 43 patients using either PSI guides or conventional instrumentation. Intra-operative measurements, meniscal bearing size implanted, and post-operative radiographic analyses were performed to assess component positioning. Functional outcome was determined using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). RESULTS: PSI guides could not be used in three cases due to concerns regarding accuracy and registration onto native anatomy, particularly on the tibial side. In general, similar component alignment and positioning was achieved using the two systems (n.s. for coronal/sagittal alignment and tibial coverage). The PSI group had greater tibial slope (p = 0.029). The control group had a higher number of optimum size meniscal bearing inserted (95 vs 52%; p = 0.001). There were no differences in OKS improvements (n.s). CONCLUSION: Component positioning for the two groups was similar for the femur but less accurate on the tibial side using PSI, often with some unnecessarily deep resections of the tibial plateau. Although PSI was comparable to conventional instrumentation based on OKS improvements at 12 months, we continue to use conventional instrumentation for UKA at our institution until further improvements to the PSI guides can be demonstrated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level I. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-08-22 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5966491/ /pubmed/28831554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4677-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Knee Alvand, Abtin Khan, Tanvir Jenkins, Cathy Rees, Jonathan L. Jackson, William F. Dodd, Christopher A. F. Murray, David W. Price, Andrew J. The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study |
title | The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study |
title_full | The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study |
title_fullStr | The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study |
title_short | The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study |
title_sort | impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study |
topic | Knee |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5966491/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28831554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4677-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT alvandabtin theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT khantanvir theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT jenkinscathy theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT reesjonathanl theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT jacksonwilliamf theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT doddchristopheraf theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT murraydavidw theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT priceandrewj theimpactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT alvandabtin impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT khantanvir impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT jenkinscathy impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT reesjonathanl impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT jacksonwilliamf impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT doddchristopheraf impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT murraydavidw impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy AT priceandrewj impactofpatientspecificinstrumentationonunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudy |