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

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.

Patient-specific instrumentation makes sense in total knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery was initially developed to increase accuracy. The potential PSI benefits have expanded in the last decade, and other advantages have been published. However, different authors are critical of PSI and argue that the advantages are not such and do not compensate for the extra cost. This article aims to describe the recently published advantages and disadvantages of PSI.

AREAS COVERED

Narrative description of the latest publications related to PSI in accuracy, clinical and functional outcomes, operative time, efficiency, and other benefits.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

We have published high accuracy of the system, with a not clinically relevant loss of accuracy, significantly higher precision with PSI than with conventional instruments, and a high percentage of cases in the optimal range and similar to that obtained with computer-assisted navigation, greater imprecision for tibial slope, a significant blood loss reduction, and time consumption, an acceptable and non-significant increase in the cost per procedure and no difference in complications during hospital admission and at 90 days. We think that PSI will not follow the Scott Parabola and that it will continue to be a valuable type of device in some instances of TKA surgery.