Accuracy of Coronal Plane Mechanical Alignment in a Customized, Individually Made Total Knee Replacement with Patient-Specific Instrumentation

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of a customized individually made total knee implant used in conjunction with patient-specific cutting guides in restoring coronal plane mechanical axis alignment using computer-assisted surgery (CAS). A consecutive series of 63 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients were prospectively measured with intraoperative CAS. The patient-specific instruments and implants were created utilizing a preoperative CT scan. CAS system was used for all patients, to determine mechanical alignment. Bone cuts were made using the patient-specific instruments. Both bone cuts and final coronal mechanical alignment were recorded utilizing the navigation system for the assessment.

The patient-specific instruments and implants provided perfect neutral coronal mechanical alignment (0°) in 53 patients. The remaining 10 patients had a postoperative alignment within ± 2° of neutral. The average preoperative deformity was 5.57° versus 0.18° postoperatively (p < 0.0001). The mean correction angle was 5.68°. No patients had postoperative extension deficits as measured with CAS (7.50° pre-op for 40/63 patients). Customized, individually made total knee implant with patient-specific cutting jigs showed results that are comparable to those of CAS systems in this study. This technology restores the neutral coronal mechanical axis very accurately, while offering unique benefits such as improved implant fit and restoration of the patient's J-curves, which require further investigation.

Keywords

customized knee implant - mechanical alignment - patient-specific instruments - computer-assisted surgery - total knee arthroplasty

• References

• 1 Noble Jr JW, Moore CA, Liu N. The value of patient-matched instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (01) 153-155
• 2 Tew M, Waugh W. Tibiofemoral alignment and the results of knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1985; 67 (04) 551-556
• 3 Hsu HP, Garg A, Walker PS, Spector M, Ewald FC. Effect of knee component alignment on tibial load distribution with clinical correlation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; (248) 135-144
• 4 Green GV, Berend KR, Berend ME, Glisson RR, Vail TP. The effects of varus tibial alignment on proximal tibial surface strain in total knee arthroplasty: the posteromedial hot spot. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17 (08) 1033-1039
• 5 Wasielewski RC, Galante JO, Leighty RM, Natarajan RN, Rosenberg AG. Wear patterns on retrieved polyethylene tibial inserts and their relationship to technical considerations during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994; (299) 31-43
• 6 Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM, Meding JB. Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement. Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994; (299) 153-156
• 7 Mason JB, Fehring TK, Estok R, Banel D, Fahrbach K. Meta-analysis of alignment outcomes in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (08) 1097-1106
• 8 Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA. Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991; 73 (05) 709-714
• 9 Insall JN. Presidential address to The Knee Society. Choices and compromises in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; (226) 43-48
• 10 Hetaimish BM, Khan MM, Simunovic N, Al-Harbi HH, Bhandari M, Zalzal PK. Meta-analysis of navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (06) 1177-1182
• 11 Lustig S, Scholes CJ, Oussedik SI, Kinzel V, Coolican MR, Parker DA. Unsatisfactory accuracy as determined by computer navigation of VISIONAIRE patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (03) 469-473
• 12 Klatt BA, Goyal N, Austin MS, Hozack WJ. Custom-fit total knee arthroplasty (OtisKnee) results in malalignment. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23 (01) 26-29
• 13 Barrett W, Hoeffel D, Dalury D, Mason JB, Murphy J, Himden S. In-vivo alignment comparing patient specific instrumentation with both conventional and computer assisted surgery (CAS) instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (02) 343-347
• 14 Abdel MP, Parratte S, Blanc G. , et al. No benefit of patient-specific instrumentation in TKA on functional and gait outcomes: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (08) 2468-2476
• 15 Nunley RM, Ellison BS, Ruh EL. , et al. Are patient-specific cutting blocks cost-effective for total knee arthroplasty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (03) 889-894
• 16 Nunley RM, Ellison BS, Zhu J, Ruh EL, Howell SM, Barrack RL. Do patient-specific guides improve coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (03) 895-902
• 17 Fang DM, Ritter MA, Davis KE. Coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty: just how important is it?. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (6, Suppl) 39-43
• 18 Ng VY, DeClaire JH, Berend KR, Gulick BC, Lombardi Jr AV. Improved accuracy of alignment with patient-specific positioning guides compared with manual instrumentation in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (01) 99-107
• 19 Koeck FX, Beckmann J, Luring C, Rath B, Grifka J, Basad E. Evaluation of implant position and knee alignment after patient-specific unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 2011; 18 (05) 294-299
• 20 Ivie CB, Probst PJ, Bal AK, Stannard JT, Crist BD, Sonny Bal B. Improved radiographic outcomes with patient-specific total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (11) 2100-2103
• 21 Hirschmann MT, Konala P, Amsler F, Iranpour F, Friederich NF, Cobb JP. The position and orientation of total knee replacement components: a comparison of conventional radiographs, transverse 2D-CT slices and 3D-CT reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93 (05) 629-633
• 22 Victor J, Van Doninck D, Labey L, Innocenti B, Parizel PM, Bellemans J. How precise can bony landmarks be determined on a CT scan of the knee?. Knee 2009; 16 (05) 358-365