No difference in mid-term survival and clinical outcome between patient-specific and conventional instrumented total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

High patient satisfaction with Customized Total Knee Arthroplasty at five year follow-up

PURPOSE

Despite numerous studies demonstrating promising short-term outcomes of Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with Customized Individually Made (CIM) implants, there is a significant lack of data on their mid-term effectiveness. Given the increasing number of TKAs performed annually, the rising demand for CIM implants, and the associated burden of revision surgeries, understanding the mid-term performance of CIM implants is crucial. Therefore, this study aims to report on the mid-term (minimum 5 years) outcomes of TKA using a CIM implant.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included a consecutive series of 116 patients who received the ConforMIS® iTotal CR implant between 2015 and 2018. Inclusion criteria were end-stage knee osteoarthritis with coronal deformities below 10° and absence of ligamentous instability. Exclusion criteria included simultaneous bilateral TKA. Patients were followed up at a minimum of five years post-surgery. They completed a questionnaire reporting on satisfaction, pain levels using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), current weight, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and the Forgotten Joint Score for the knee (FJS-knee). Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics for demographic and clinical variables, and outcomes were reported as means with ranges.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up duration was 5.9 ± 0.8 years (range 5-7.4 years). 90% of patients stated they would undergo the same operation again, and 93% were either satisfied or very satisfied. The mean VAS for pain at rest was 2 ± 1.5 (range 0-6) and during exercise was 3 ± 2 (range 0-8). 58 patients (53%) managed to lose weight. The mean OKS was 41 ± 9 points (range 15-48), and the mean FJS-knee was 67 ± 23 points (range 4-100). No severe complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

CIM TKA using the ConforMIS® iTotal CR implant can achieve excellent results with 93% of patients being satisfied or very satisfied at mid-term follow-up of five years. Prospective, randomized, and patient-blinded trials comparing off-the-shelf (OTS) TKAs with CIM implants are necessary to evaluate whether these implants are superior or not.

Association of Technology Usage and Decreased Revision TKA Rates for Low-Volume Surgeons Using an Optimal Prosthesis Combination: An Analysis of 53,264 Primary TKAs

BACKGROUND

Technology (navigation and robotics) usage during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is often supported by literature involving high-volume surgeons and hospitals, but the value of technology for lower-volume surgeons is uncertain. This study aimed to determine if there was a relationship among surgeon volume, technology usage, and revision rate when using an optimal prosthesis combination (OPC).

METHODS

Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) data were obtained from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2022, for all primary TKA procedures performed for osteoarthritis using an OPC by a known surgeon ≥5 years after their first recorded procedure. The interaction between surgeon volume and conventional-instrumentation (CV) versus technology-assisted (TA) TKA was assessed. The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was determined by Kaplan-Meier estimates. Cox proportional-hazards methods were used to compare rates of revision by surgeon volume and by the interaction of volume and technology. Subanalyses were undertaken to examine major and minor revisions separately, and to assess the influence of technology on revision rates relative to those of a surgeon undertaking 100 TKA/year.

RESULTS

Of the 53,264 procedures that met the inclusion criteria, 31,536 were TA-TKA and 21,728 were CV-TKA. Use of technology reduced the all-cause revision rate for surgeons with a volume of <50 TKA/year and the rate of minor revisions for surgeons with a volume of <40 TKA/year. No interaction between surgeon volume and the rate of major revision surgery was found. With CV-TKA by a surgeon with a 100-TKA/year volume as the comparator, all-cause and major revision rates were significantly elevated for surgeons undertaking <50 and <100 TKA/year, respectively. In contrast, analysis of TA-TKA showed no difference in rates of all-cause or major revisions for surgeons undertaking <100 TKA/year compared with 100 TKA/year.

CONCLUSIONS

TA-TKA was associated with a decrease in the revision rate for lower-volume surgeons but no significant alterations in revision rate for higher-volume surgeons. Preferential use of TA-TKA by lower-volume surgeons should be considered.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

First long-term analysis of survival and clinical outcome in patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty: follow-up of a prospective cohort study

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) was introduced to improve post-operative alignment, and consequently the revision rate and clinical results after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Short- to mid-term data are conflicting regarding these theoretical advantages of PSI. The purpose of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the survival rate and clinical outcome in PSI TKA 8.4 years after initial surgery. To our knowledge, no other study investigated long-term follow-up of TKA procedures using PSI. From a total cohort of 184 consecutive patients (200 TKA) 136 patients (144 TKA, 72%) were prospectively analysed at a mean follow-up of 8.4 years (±0.4). A survival analysis with all-cause revision of TKA as endpoint was performed. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were obtained preoperatively and after 1-, 2-, 5-, and 8.4-years of follow-up. Differences between these moments of follow-up were analysed. At final follow-up, 4 TKAs (2%) had undergone revision, all between 2-4 years after primary surgery. Reasons for revision were late infection, aseptic loosening, instability and polyethylene insert breakage. The median score of certain PROMs (WOMAC, VAS, EQ-index, EQ-VAS) decreased compared to previous follow-up scores but were significantly higher than preoperative scores. After 8.4 years of follow-up, no additional revision surgery was performed compared to 5-years postoperatively. Certain PROMs at 8.4-year follow-up decreased compared to earlier moments of follow-up, but all PROMs improved compared to preoperative PROMs.

Cost-effectiveness of patient specific vs conventional instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Over the past years, patient specific instrumentation (PSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been implemented and routinely used. No clear answer has been given on its associated cost and cost-effectiveness when compared to conventional instrumentation (CI) for TKA.

AIM

To compare the cost and cost-effectiveness of PSI TKA compared to CI TKA.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in healthcare, economical healthcare, and medical databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EconLit). It was conducted in April 2021 and again in January 2022. Relevant literature included randomised controlled trials, retrospective studies, prospective studies, observational studies, and case control studies. All studies were assessed on methodological quality. Relevant outcomes included incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, quality-adjusted life years, total costs, imaging costs, production costs, sterilization associated costs, surgery duration costs and readmission rate costs. All eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed for outcomes with sufficient data.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were included into the systematic review. Two were included in the meta-analysis. 3994 PSI TKAs and 13267 CI TKAs were included in the sample size. The methodological quality of the included studies, based on Consensus on Health Economic Criteria-scores and risk of bias, ranged from average to good. PSI TKA costs less than CI TKA when considering mean operating room time and its associated costs and tray sterilization per patient case. PSI TKA costs more compared to CI TKA when considering imaging and production costs. Considering total costs per patient case, PSI TKA is more expensive in comparison to CI TKA. Meta-analysis comparing total costs for PSI TKA, and CI TKA showed a significant higher cost for PSI TKA.

CONCLUSION

Cost for PSI and CI TKA can differ when considering distinct aspects of their implementation. Total costs per patient case are increased for PSI TKA when compared to CI TKA.

Patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: a review of the current literature

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most frequently performed interventions in the field of Orthopaedic surgery. Over the last decades the implantation technique has improved continuously. The majority of patients is satisfied with the clinical outcome of TKA. However in various clinical follow-ups, up to 20% of unsatisfied patients can be observed. Periprosthetic infection and aseptic loosening seem to be the most common reasons for failure. Malalignment has been discussed as a cause of aseptic loosening and often leads to revision surgery. In order to increase the precision of implant positioning and alignment, new technologies such as patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) have been developed. Since the introduction of PSI, multiple clinical studies have been performed analyzing the clinical and radiological outcome of TKA with PSI technique. This review covers the recent literature of PSI in respect to surgical accuracy, clinical outcome, time- and cost-effectiveness.

The efficacy and safety of patient-specific instrumentation in primary total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery has been shown to increase accuracy of component positioning. However, it is unclear whether this also translates to actual benefits for patients in terms of better outcomes (efficacy) or less complications such as revisions (safety). We therefore systematically reviewed the literature to determine the efficacy and safety of PSI in primary TKA.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing PSI to non-PSI in primary TKA were included. A random effects model was used with meta-regression in case of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were included with a total of 1816 TKA in the PSI group and 1887 TKA in the control group. There were no clinically relevant differences between the PSI-group and non-PSI group regarding all outcomes. There was considerable heterogeneity: meta-regression analyses showed that the year the study was published was an important effect modifier. Early publications tended to show a positive effect for PSI compared to non-PSI TKA, whereas later studies found the opposite.

CONCLUSION

Based on evidence of moderate certainty, our study suggested that there were no clinically relevant differences in efficacy and safety between patients treated with PSI TKA and patients treated with non-PSI TKA.

Functional outcomes in patient specific instrumentation vs. conventional instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty; a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

Background

Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) is an established surgical option for knee osteoarthritis (OA). There are varying perceptions of the most suitable surgical technique for making bone cuts in TKA. Conventional Instrumentation (CI) uses generic cutting guides (extra- and intra-medullary) for TKA; however, patient specific instrumentation (PSI) has become a popular alternative amongst surgeons.

Methods

A literature search of electronic databases Embase, Medline and registry platform portals was conducted on the 16^th May 2021. The search was performed using a predesigned search strategy. Eligible studies were critically appraised for methodological quality. The primary outcome measure was Knee Society Function Score. Functional scores were also collected for the secondary outcome measures: Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain. Review Manager 5.3 was used for all data synthesis and analysis.

Results

There is no conclusive evidence in the literature to suggest that PSI or CI instrumentation is better for functional outcomes. 23 studies were identified for inclusion in this study. Twenty-two studies (18 randomised controlled trials and 4 prospective studies) were included in the meta analysis, with a total of 2277 total knee arthroplasties. There were 1154 PSI TKA and 1123 CI TKA. The majority of outcomes at 3-months, 6-months and 12 show no statistical difference. There was statistical significance at 24 months in favour of PSI group for KSS function (mean difference 4.36, 95% confidence interval 1.83–6.89). The mean difference did not exceed the MCID of 6.4. KSS knee scores demonstrated statistical significance at 24 months (mean difference 2.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42—4.31), with a MCID of 5.9. WOMAC scores were found to be statistically significant favouring PSI group at 12 months (mean difference -3.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.57- -0.36) and 24 months (mean difference -0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.28—-0.03), with high level of bias noted in the studies and a MCID of 10.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis of level 1 and level 2 evidence shows there is no clinical difference when comparing PSI and CI KSS function scores for TKA at definitive post operative time points (3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months). Within the secondary outcomes for this study, there was no clinical difference between PSI and CI for TKA. Although there was no clinical difference between PSI and CI for TKA, there was statistical significance noted at 24 months in favour of PSI compared to CI for TKA when considering KSS function, KSS knee scores and WOMAC scores. Studies included in this meta-analysis were of limited cohort size and prospective studies were prone to methodological bias. The current literature is limited and insufficiently robust to make explicit conclusions and therefore further high-powered robust RCTs are required at specific time points.

Minimum 5-Year Outcomes of a Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Control Trial Assessing Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Patient-Specific Instrumentation in Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) was developed to produce more accurate alignment of components and consequently improve clinical outcomes when used in total knee arthroplasty. We compare radiological accuracy and clinical outcomes at a minimum of 5-year follow-up between patients randomized to undergo total knee arthroplasty performed using PSI or traditional cutting block techniques.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized control trial included patients blinded to the technique 1used. Outcome measures were coronal alignment measured radiologically, Euroqol-5D, Oxford knee score, and International Knee Society Score measured at 1- and 5-year follow-up.

RESULTS

At a minimum 5-year follow-up, there were 38 knees in the PSI group and 39 in the conventional instrumentation group for analysis. Baseline demographics and clinical outcome scores were matched between groups. Overall, there was no significant difference in the coronal femoral angle (P = .59), coronal tibial angle (P = .37), tibiofemoral angle (P = .99), sagittal femoral angle (P = .34), or the posterior tibia slope (P = .12) between knees implanted using PSI and those implanted with traditional cutting blocks. On the measurement of coronal alignment, intraobserver reliability tests demonstrated substantial agreement (k = 0.64). Clinical outcomes at both 1-year and 5-year follow-up demonstrated statistically significant and clinically relevant improvement in scores from baseline in both groups, but no difference could be detected between the Euroqol-5D (P = .78), Oxford knee score (P = .24), or International Knee Society Score (P = .86) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown no additional benefit to PSI in terms of improved alignment or functional outcomes at minimum 5-year follow-up over traditional techniques.

Patient-specific guides in orthopedic surgery

The interest of patient-specific guides (PSGs) lies in reliable intraoperative achievement of preoperative planning goals. They are a form of instrumentation optimizing intraoperative precision and thus improving the safety and reproducibility of surgical procedures. Clinical superiority, however, has not been demonstrated. The various steps from design to implementation leave room for error, which needs to be known and controlled by the surgeon who is responsible for final outcome. Instituting large-scale patient-specific surgery requires management systems for guides and innovative implants which cannot be a simple extension of current practices. We shall approach the present state of knowledge regarding PSGs via 5 questions: (1) What is a PSG? Single-use instrumentation produced after preoperative planning, aiming exclusively to optimize procedural exactness. (2) How to use and assess PSGs in orthopedic surgery? Strict rules of use must be adhered to. Any deviation from the predefined objective is, necessarily, an error that must be identified as such. (3) Do PSGs provide greater surgical exactness? The contribution of PSGs varies greatly between procedures. Exactness is enhanced in the spine, in osteotomies around the knee and in bone-tumor surgery. In the shoulder, their contribution is seen only in complex cases. Data are sparse for hip replacement, and controversial for knee replacement. (4) What are the expected benefits of PSGs? As well as improving exactness, PSGs allow a lower radiation dose and shorter operating time. They also enable junior surgeons to train in techniques otherwise reserved to hyperspecialists. (5) How to include PSGs in everyday practice? As well as their potential clinical interest, PSGs involve deep changes in organization, equipment provision and economic model. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V; expert opinion.

[Clinical application of distal femoral patient-specific cutting guide based on knee CT and full-length X-ray film of lower extremities]

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the feasibility and accuracy of distal femoral patient-specific cutting guide in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) based on knee CT and full-length X-ray film of lower extremities.

METHODS

Between July 2016 and February 2017, 20 patients with severe knee joint osteoarthritis planned to undergo primary TKA were selected as the research object. There were 9 males and 11 females; aged 53-84 years, with an average of 69.4 years. The body mass index was 22.1-31.0 kg/m 2, with an average of 24.8 kg/m 2. The preoperative range of motion (ROM) of the knee joint was (103.0±19.4)°, the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score was 5.4±1.3, and the American Hospital of Special Surgery (HSS) score was 58.1±11.3. Before operation, a three-dimensional model of the knee joint was constructed based on the full-length X-ray film of lower extremities and CT of the knee joint. The distal femoral patient-specific cutting guide was designed and fabricated, and the thickness of the distal femoral osteotomy was determined by digital simulation. The thickness of the internal and external condyle of the distal femur osteotomy before operation and the actual thickness of the intraoperative osteotomy were compared. The intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage loss, and hidden blood loss were recorded. The ROM of knee joint, VAS score, and HSS score at 3 months after operation were recorded to evaluate effectiveness. The position of the coronal and sagittal plane of the distal femoral prosthesis were assessed by comparing the femoral mechanical-anatomical angle (FMAA), anatomical lateral distal femoral angle (aLDFA), mechanical femoral tibial angle (mFTA), distal femoral flexion angle (DFFA), femoral prosthesis flexion angle (FPFA), anatomical lateral femoral component angle (aLFC), and the angle of the femoral component and femoral shaft (α angle) between pre- and post-operation.

RESULTS

TKA was successfully completed with the aid of the distal femoral patient-specific cutting guide. There was no significant difference between the thickness of the internal and lateral condyle of the distal femur osteotomy before operation and the actual thickness of the intraoperative osteotomy ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 3 months. All incisions healed by first intention, and there was no complications such as periarticular infection and deep vein thrombosis. Except for 1 patient who was not treated with tranexamic acid, the intraoperative blood loss of the rest 19 patients ranged from 30 to 150 mL, with an average of 73.2 mL; the postoperative drainage loss ranged from 20 to 500 mL, with an average of 154.5 mL; and the hidden blood loss ranged from 169.2 to 1 400.0 mL, with an average of 643.8 mL. At 3 months after operation, the ROM of the knee was (111.5±11.5)°, and there was no significant difference when compared with the preoperative one ( t=-1.962, P=0.065). The VAS score was 2.4±0.9 and HSS score was 88.2±7.5, showing significant differences when compared with the preoperative ones ( t=7.248, P=0.000; t=-11.442, P=0.000). Compared with the preoperative measurements, there was a significant difference in mFTA ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in aLDFA, FMAA, or DFFA; compared with the preoperative plan, there was no significant difference in FPFA, aLFC, or α angle ( P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The use of distal femoral patient-specific cutting guide based on knee CT and full-length X-ray film of lower extremity can achieve precise osteotomy, improve coronal and sagittal limb alignment, reduce intraoperative blood loss, and obtain satisfactory short-term effectiveness.

[New technologies (robotics, custom-made) in unicondylar knee arthroplasty-pro]

BACKGROUND

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty offers the advantage that partial degenerative changes can be addressed with partial prosthetic solutions, thus preserving as much of the native joint as possible, including the cruciate ligaments. On the other hand, the number of revisions is still higher than for total knee endoprosthetics. In the literature, the causes mentioned are insufficient fit of the components as well as surgical errors. The use of new technologies to achieve a better fit and higher surgical precision and reproducibility, therefore, represents a promising approach.

INDIVIDUAL ENDOPROSTHETICS

Individual endoprosthetics offers the advantage that the prosthesis is adapted to the individual anatomy of each patient and not the patient's anatomy to the prosthesis, as is the case with standard prostheses. This allows for an optimal fit of the prosthesis while avoiding excessive bone resections and soft tissue releases.

ROBOTICS

The use of robotics in endoprosthetics makes it easier to correctly perform bone resections and align components. This ensures high and reproducible precision even for surgeons with lower case numbers. Studies on individual unicondylar endoprosthetics and robotics are reporting promising results. However, long-term results of high-quality randomized studies must be awaited in order to make a scientifically sound statement.

Comparable clinical outcome and implant longevity after CT- or MRI-based patient-specific instruments for total knee arthroplasty: a 2-year follow-up of a RCT

PURPOSE

Patient-specific instruments (PSI) are already widespread used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Either computed tomography (CT) scans or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans are used pre-operatively to create jigs to guide resection during surgery. This study is a sequel of previous work that showed significantly more radiological outliers for posterior slope when CT-based guides were used. The aim of this study was to assess differences in revision rate and clinical outcome between the two groups at 2-year follow-up.

METHODS

At the 2-year follow-up, 124 patients were analysed in this prospective, randomised single-blind study. A survival analysis with revision of the TKA as endpoint was performed. Patients fulfilled four patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). Scores on the questionnaires were compared between both groups at the different follow-up visits.

RESULTS

At final follow-up, there was no significant difference in the survival rates of the CT- and MRI-based PSI surgery. Postoperatively, the PROMs significantly improved within each group compared with the pre-operative values. There were no significant differences for the PROMs between both groups at the 2-years follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Although previous results showed more outliers regarding posterior slope for CT-based PSIs, no difference in revision rate or the outcome of PROMs was found at 2-year follow-up. Further research to determine what the influence is of radiological outliers on implant survival and clinical outcomes is necessary.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Patient-Specific or Conventional Instrumentations: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare knee arthroplasty with patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) with the conventional instrumentation (CI).

Methods

RCTs were selected in PubMed and Embase from 2012 to 2018. Key data extracted included malalignment of mechanical axis, blood loss, surgical time, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Society Score (KSS), length of stay, and complications. Subgroup analysis was also performed regarding different PSI systems and different image processing methods.

Results

29 RCTs with 2487 knees were eligible for the meta-analysis. Results showed that PSI did not improve the alignment of the mechanical axis compared with CI, but MRI-based PSI and Visionaire-specific PSI decrease the risk of malalignment significantly (P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and P = 0.04 and

Conclusion

PSI reduced the blood loss and improved KSS. MRI-based PSI reduced operative time and risk of malalignment of mechanical axis compared with CT-based PSI. Moreover, Visionaire-specific PSI achieves better alignment result of the mechanical axis than other systems.