Author:
Cai Junfeng,Ma Min,Zeng Wen,Luo Shuling,Yuan Feng,Yin Feng
Abstract
Abstract
Background
To investigate whether patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) improves the femoral component positioning of implants during unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) using cadaver bone models.
Methods
Fifty adult cadaveric femoral bone specimens collected from February 2016–2018, were randomized to receive medial UKA with a PSI guide (n = 25) or conventional instrumentation (CI) (n = 25). Standard anteroposterior and lateral view radiographs were obtained postoperatively to assess the coronal and sagittal positioning of the femoral prostheses, respectively. The osteotomy time was recorded to assess the convenience of PSI in guiding osteotomy.
Results
Osteotomy time significantly shortened in the PSI group (3.12 ± 0.65 versus 4.33 ± 0.73 min, p < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the postoperative coronal alignment of the femoral component between the PSI and CI groups (varus/valgus angle: 1.43 ± 0.93° vs. 2.65 ± 1.50°, p = 0.001). The prevalence of outliers in coronal alignment was lower in the PSI than the CI group (2/25, 8% vs. 9/25, 36%). Sagittal posterior slope angle of the femoral component was significantly different between the two groups (8.80 ± 0.65° and 6.29 ± 1.88° in the CI and PSI groups, respectively, p < 0.001). The malalignment rate of the femoral component in the sagittal plane was 60% in the CI group, whereas no positioning deviation was observed in the PSI group.
Conclusion
This study used a cadaver model to support the fact that CT-based PSI shows an advantage over CI in optimizing implant positioning for UKAs.
Funder
Shanghai Municipal Committee of Science and Technology
Pudong Health and Family Planning Commission of Shanghai
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference32 articles.
1. Griffin T, Rowden N, Morgan D, Atkinson R, Woodruff P, Maddern G. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of unicompartmental osteoarthritis: a systematic study. ANZ J Surg. 2007;77(4):214–21.
2. Huang Q, Zeng Y, Hu Q, Si H, Nie Y, Shen B. [Comparison of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in the treatment of severe medial compartment osteoarthritis]. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2021;35(9):1125–32.
3. Casper DS, Fleischman AN, Papas PV, Grossman J, Scuderi GR, Lonner JH. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty provides significantly Greater improvement in function than total knee arthroplasty despite equivalent satisfaction for isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34(8):1611–6.
4. Rodriguez-Merchan EC. Medial Unicompartmental Osteoarthritis (MUO) of the knee: unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) or total knee replacement (TKR). Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2014;2(3):137–40.
5. Horikawa A, Miyakoshi N, Shimada Y, Kodama H. Comparison of clinical outcomes between total knee arthroplasty and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the knee: a retrospective analysis of preoperative and postoperative results. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:168.