Health costs and efficiencies of patient-specific and single-use instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: a randomised controlled trial

Better operating room efficiency and reduced staff demand: Individualised versus off-the-shelf total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The purpose of this pilot cross-sectional study was to compare the operating room (OR) efficiency and intraoperative staff task load when performing individualised versus off-the-shelf (OTS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

A consecutive series of 28 patients randomised (1:1) to receive either OTS TKA or individualised TKA were included. The OR staff workload was assessed with the NASA Task Load Index (TLX), a subjective grading system assessing mental demand, physical demand, temporal demand, performance, effort and frustration on a scale from 0 (very low) to 20 (very high). The time for patient preparation, surgical time, closure and total OR time was recorded to assess OR efficiency. Effect sizes of differences between OTS and individualised TKA were expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Patients in both cohorts were similar in age (OTS vs. individualised TKA (median [IQR]), 67 [63-76] vs. 71 [68-79]; p = 0.207) and body mass index (BMI) (29 [24-33] vs. 29 [26-31]; p = 0.807), and there were no significant differences in other preoperative characteristics. The OR staff perceived individualised TKA as less demanding than OTS TKA: Individualised TKA was rated significantly better across the six domains of the NASA TLX: mental demand by 5.6 points, physical demand by 6.3 points, temporal demand by 5.3 points, performance by 3.6 points, effort by 5.9 points and frustration by 5.8 points. Individualised TKA resulted in statistically significantly shorter mean total OR time (MD, 10 min; p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

The staff in the OR found that individualised TKA is less mentally, physically and temporally demanding than OTS TKA. The average total time spent in the OR during individualised TKA is 10 min less than during OTS TKA.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study constitutes a part of a larger registered randomised controlled trial comparing patient satisfaction following OTS versus individualised TKA (NCT04460989).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

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.

Can Technology Assistance be Cost Effective in TKA? A Simulation-Based Analysis of a Risk-prioritized, Practice-specific Framework

BACKGROUND

Robotic, navigated, and patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) TKA procedures have been introduced to improve component placement precision and improve implant survivorship and other clinical outcomes. However, the best available evidence has shown that these technologies are ineffective in reducing revision rates in the general TKA patient population. Nonetheless, it seems plausible that these technologies could be an effective and cost-effective means of reducing revision risk in clinical populations that are at an elevated risk of revision because of patient-specific demographics (such as older age at index surgery, elevated BMI, and being a man). Since clinical trials on this topic would need to be very large, a simulation approach could provide insight on which clinical populations would be the most promising for analysis.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We conducted a simulation-based analysis and asked: (1) Given key demographic parameters characterizing a patient population, together with estimates of the precision achievable with selected forms of technology assistance in TKA, can we estimate the expected distributions of anticipated reductions in lifetime revision risk for that population and the associated improvements in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) that would be expected to result? (2) Are there realistic practice characteristics (such as combinations of local patient demographics and capital and per-procedure costs) for which applying a per-patient risk-prioritized policy for using technology-assisted TKA could be considered cost-effective based on projected cost savings from reductions in revision rates?

METHODS

We designed simulations of hypothetical practice-specific clinical scenarios, each characterized by patient volume, patient demographics, and technology-assisted surgical technique, using demographic information drawn from other studies to characterize two contrasting simulated clinical scenarios in which the distributions of factors describing patients undergoing TKA place one population at a comparatively elevated risk of revision (elevated-risk population) and the second at a comparatively reduced risk of revision (lower-risk population). We used results from previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses to estimate the implant precision in coronal plane alignment for patient-specific instrumentation, navigated, and robotic technology. We generated simulated TKA patient populations based on risk estimates from large clinical studies, structured reviews, and meta-analyses and calculated the patient-specific reduction in the revision risk and the change in QALYs attributable to the technology-assisted intervention in each of the two simulated clinical scenarios. We also incorporated a sensitivity analysis, incorporating variations in the effect size of deviations from overall coronal alignment on revision risk and difference in health state utilities acquired through a structured review process. We then simulated the outcomes of 25,000 operations per patient using the precisions associated with the conventional TKA technique, the three technology-assisted techniques, and a hypothetical technology-assisted intervention that could consistently deliver perfectly neutral overall coronal alignment, which is unachievable in practice. A risk-prioritized treatment policy was emulated by ordering the simulated patients from the highest to lowest predicted increase in QALYs, such that simulated patients who would see the greatest increase in the QALYs (and therefore the greatest reduction in lifetime revision risk) were the patients to receive technology-assisted TKA intervention in a practice. We used cost estimates acquired through a structured review process and calculated the net added costs of each of the three technology-assisted techniques as a function of the percent utilization (proportion of patients treated with technology assistance in a practice), factoring in fixed costs, per-procedure variable costs, and savings occurring from the prevention of future revision surgery. Finally, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and marginal cost-effectiveness ratio (MCER) for each technology-assisted technique for the two clinical scenarios. We then used a Monte Carlo approach to simulate variations in key patient risk, health state, and economic factors as well as to obtain a distribution of estimates for cost-effectiveness. We considered an intervention to be cost effective if either the ICER or MCER values were below USD/QALY 63,000.

RESULTS

For the lower-risk population, the median reduction in the revision risk was 0.9% (0.4% to 2.2%, extrema from the sensitivity analysis) and 1.8% (0.9% to 4.4%) for PSI and robotic TKA, respectively, and 1.9% (1.0% to 4.6%) for ideal TKA. In contrast, the median reduction in the revision risk in the elevated-risk clinical scenario was 2.0% (1.2% to 3.4%) and 4.6% (2.7% to 8.5%) for PSI and robotic TKA and 5.1% (3.0% to 9.4%) for ideal TKA. Estimated differences in the cumulative gain in QALYs attributable to technology-assisted TKA ranged from 0.6 (0.2 to 1.8) to 4.0 (1.8 to 10.0) QALYs per 100 patients, depending on the intervention type and clinical scenario. For PSI, we found treating 15% of patients in the lower-risk population and 77% in the elevated-risk population could meet the threshold for being considered cost effective. For navigated TKA systems offering high alignment precision, we found the intervention could meet this threshold for practice sizes of at least 300 patients per year and a percent utilization of 27% in the lower-risk population. In the elevated-risk population, cost-effectiveness could be achieved in practice volumes as small as 100 patients per year with a percent utilization of at least 6%, and cost savings could be achieved with a percent utilization of at least 45%. We found that robotic TKA could only meet the threshold for being considered cost-effectiveness in the lower-risk population if yearly patient volumes exceeded 600 and for a limited range of percent utilization (27% to 32%). However, in the elevated-risk patient population, robotic TKA with high alignment precision could potentially be cost effective for practice sizes as small as 100 patients per year and a percent utilization of at least 20% if a risk-prioritized treatment protocol were used.

CONCLUSION

Based on these simulations, a selective-use policy for technology-assisted TKA that prioritizes using technology assistance for those patients at a higher risk of revision based on patient-specific factors could potentially meet the cost-effectiveness threshold in selected circumstances (for example, primarily in elevated-risk populations and larger practice sizes). Whether it does meet that threshold would depend significantly on the surgical precision that can be achieved in practice for a given proposed technology as well as on the true local costs of using the proposed technology. We further recommend that any future randomized trials seeking to demonstrate possible effects of technology assistance on revision risk focus on clinical populations that are at higher risk of revision (such as, patient populations that are relatively younger, have higher BMIs, and higher proportions of men).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study suggests that technology assistance is only likely to prove cost effective in selected circumstances rather than in all clinical populations and practice settings. In general, we project that surgical navigation is most likely to prove cost effective in the widest range of circumstances, that PSI may be cost effective or cost neutral in a moderate range of circumstances, and that robotic surgery is only likely to be cost effective in moderately large practices containing patients who are on average at an intrinsically elevated risk of revision.

Three dimensional printing as an aid for pre-operative planning in complex cases of total joint arthroplasty: A case series

Purpose

Digital templating is an essential aspect of pre-operative planning for total joint arthroplasty procedures. For complex cases of joint reconstruction, the standard templating software is insufficient to achieve the desired accuracy. 3D printing significantly aids the pre-operative planning in complicated cases of joint reconstruction and offers immense potential towards improving outcomes in these cases. The purpose of the present study is to present the various ways in which 3D printing has aided our department in facilitating complex cases of lower extremity reconstruction.

Methods

Data was retrospectively retrieved for all patients that underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with the aid of 3D printing technology at our institution between January 2016-February 2021. Patient pain was determined before and after surgery using the visual analogue scale (VAS). Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were additionally analyzed using the hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS) and knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS).

Results

The final study population consisted of 39 patients that underwent TKA or THA procedures with the use of 3D printing. Twenty-four (61.5%) of the surgeries in the study were THA procedures, whereas 15 (38.5%) were TKA procedures. The average VAS for patients reduced from 8.4% before surgery to 5.4% after surgery (p < 0.001). The mean KOOS of patients that underwent TKA was 17.33 ± 9.33 (43%) and the mean HOOS of patients that underwent THA was 13.79 ± 6.6 (42%).

Conclusions

The following series demonstrates the ability by which 3D printing facilitates complex cases of hip and knee reconstruction. 3D printing offers an improvement in understanding of patient specific anatomy, enhancing patient outcomes. Departments should consider the use of 3D printing technology as an adjunct when performing complex cases of lower extremity reconstruction.

Comparative Cost Analysis of Single-use Sterile versus Reprocessed Distal Radius Volar Plate Sets

BACKGROUND

With the rise in distal radius fracture (DRF) incidence and treatment through open reduction internal fixation, there are increasing concerns in the current medical cost containment climate. To help reduce costs, manufacturers are introducing sterile packed kits. The purpose of this study is to compare the costs of the single use kit (SK) against conventional reprocessed DRF surgical sets (RS).

METHODS

A four-year retrospective review at three surgical centers was performed to determine a company's RS average sterilization and processing costs. RS instrumentation cost was estimated by straight-line depreciation from the original purchase price. RS implant costs were calculated from the list price. SK list cost was obtained from the same company. Incidence of surgical delays was estimated by a survey of 23 hand surgeons and cost of delays was obtained from surgical center reports. Sensitivity analysis on delay frequency was performed to assess a range of overall costs.

RESULTS

OR delays were estimated at one out of 100 cases, with an average cost of $11 per case. For RS, average instruments, implants, and sterilization costs per case was $47, $2882, and $39. The total RS cost of $2,978 and the SK was $1,667 with a difference of $1,313 per case.

CONCLUSION

RS was found to cost $1,313 more per case than the SK in an ambulatory surgical setting and potentially more cost effective. Ultimately, pricing is highly variable at each center based on negotiated and contractual pricing.

CT-based patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty in over 700 cases: single-use instruments are as accurate as standard instruments

PURPOSE

Efforts in total knee arthroplasty are made to improve accuracy for a correct leg axis and reduce component malpositioning using patient-specific instruments. It was hypothesized that use of patient-specific instruments (vs. computer-navigated and conventional techniques) will reduce the number of outliers. Our second hypothesis was that single-use instrumentation will lead to the same accuracy compared to patient-specific instruments made of metal.

METHODS

708 primary total knee arthroplasties between 2014 and 2018 using computer tomography (CT)-based patient-specific cutting block technique and a preoperative planning protocol were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative data [hip-knee-angle (HKA), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), tibial slope, femoral component flexion] was compared to postoperative performed standard radiological follow-up X-rays. Differences of > 3° between measurements were defined as outliers.

RESULTS

Overall 500 prostheses using standard instrumentation and 208 prostheses using single-use instruments were implanted. Preoperative HKA axes (- 1.2°; p < 0.001), femoral component flexion (Δ 0.8°, p < 0.001), LDFA (Δ - 1.5°, p < 0.001), MPTA (Δ - 0.5°, p < 0.001) and tibial posterior slopes (Δ 0.5°, p < 0.001), respectively, were different from postoperative axes. More outliers occurred using standard (vs. single-use) instruments (p < 0.001) regarding postoperative HKA (ranges of standard- vs. single-use: instruments: HKA 178.0°-180.5° vs. 178.0°-180.5°, femoral component flexion 0.0°-6.0° vs. 0.0°-4.5°, LDFA 90.0°-91.0° vs. 90.0°-90.0°, MPTA 90.0°-90.0° vs. 90.0°-90.0°, tibial posterior slope - 10° to 10° vs. - 1° to 10°). No differences were seen for other angles measured. Comparing both systems, total number of outliers was higher using standard (8%) vs. single-use instruments (4.3%).

CONCLUSION

This study shows a high accuracy of CT-based patient-specific instrumentation concerning postoperative achieved knee angles and mechanical leg axes. Single-use instruments showed a similar accuracy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

A Randomized Trial Investigating the Cost-Utility of Patient-Specific Instrumentation in Total Knee Arthroplasty in an Obese Population

BACKGROUND

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been introduced in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with the goal of increased accuracy of component positioning by custom fitting cutting guides to the patient's bony anatomy. A criticism of this technology is the associated cost. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to determine the cost-utility of PSI compared with standard of care (SOC) instrumentation for TKA in an obese population.

METHODS

Patients with body mass index greater than 30 with osteoarthritis and undergoing primary TKA were randomized to SOC or PSI. Patients completed a health care resource use diary and the EuroQol-5D at three, six, nine, and 12 months and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index at three and 12 months postsurgery. We performed cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses from public health care payer and societal perspectives.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-three patients were included in the analysis with 86 patients randomized to PSI and 87 to SOC. PSI was dominated (more costly and less effective) by SOC from a health care payer perspective. From a societal perspective, an incremental cost-utility ratio was calculated at $11,230.00 per quality-adjusted life year gained, which is cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000. Net benefit analyses found PSI was not significantly cost-effective at any willingness to pay value from either perspective.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that widespread adoption of PSI may not be economically attractive or clinically indicated. Future considerations are to compare long-term clinical outcomes and radiographic alignment between the groups.

Should we abandon the patient-specific instrumentation ship in total knee arthroplasty? Not quite yet!

Patient-specific Instrumentation (PSI) is an innovative technique aiding the precise implementation of the preoperative plan during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) by using patient-specific guides and cutting blocks. Despite of the theoretical advantages, studies have reported contradictory results, thus there is no consensus regarding the overall effectiveness of PSI. Through the critical assessment of a meta-analysis published lately, this correspondence aims to highlight the complexity of comparing the efficacy of PSI to standard instrumentation (SI). The accuracy of component alignment, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), surgery time, blood loss, transfusion rate, and postoperative complications are commonly used outcomes for investigating the efficacy of PSI-aided TKA. By assessing component alignment, the expertise of the surgeon(s) should be taken into consideration, since PSI may not provide benefits for expert surgeons but might improve accuracy and patient safety during the learning curve of novice surgeons. With respect to PROMs and postoperative complications, PSI may not improve short-term results; however, long-term follow up data is missing. Regarding transfusion rates, favorable trends can be observed, but further studies utilizing recent data are needed for a clear conclusion. When assessing surgery time, we suggest focusing on operating room turnover instead of procedure time.

Patient-specific instrumentation combined with a new tool for gap balancing is useful in total knee replacement: a 3-year follow-up of a retrospective study

Objective

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the gap-balancing technique with patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) and a new balancing device in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can improve knee function to a greater extent than can the measured resection technique.

Materials and methods

Data from 150 patients who underwent TKA from August 2014 to June 2016 were studied retrospectively. The gap-balancing technique assisted by PSI and the new balancing device was used in 80 patients (82 knees), and the measured resection technique was used in 70 patients (70 knees). The surgical, imaging, and knee function data were compared.

Results

The gap-balancing technique assisted by PSI and the new balancing device was found to be feasible in all operated knees and reliable. In total, 150 patients (152 knees) of ages ranging from 52 to 78 years (mean 67 years) underwent TKA during the study period. The follow-up period ranged from 35 to 52 months (mean 45 months). Only one patient, who was included in the gap-balancing group, underwent a revision surgery at 2 years postoperatively due to infection. There were no differences in the incidence of anterior knee pain between the two groups. The mean flexion angle, KSS scores, and VAS scores did not significantly differ between the measured resection group and gap-balancing group at 12 weeks or 36 weeks postoperatively. The average joint line displacement was 1.3 ± 1.1 mm (range 0–3) proximally in the GB (gap-balancing) group and 1.2 ± 1.4 mm in the MR (measured-resection) group. No outliers >5 mm in either group were recorded. The mean leg axis deviation from the neutral mechanical axis was 1.8°±1.5° varus (range 0°–3°varus) versus the neutral mechanical axis in the GB group and 1.4°±1.2°(range 0°–3°)in the MR group. No outliers with >3° deviation in either group were recorded.

Conclusions

The gap-balancing technique performed with the new balancing device and PSI can yield accurate femoral component alignment as well as outcomes similar to those of measured resection at 3 years. The new balancing device can be taken into consideration by surgeons who prefer performing the gap-balancing technique with PSI.

Three-dimensional Printing in Orthopaedic Surgery: Current Applications and Future Developments

Three-dimensional (3D) printing is an exciting form of manufacturing technology that has transformed the way we can treat various medical pathologies. Also known as additive manufacturing, 3D printing fuses materials together in a layer-by-layer fashion to construct a final 3D product. This technology allows flexibility in the design process and enables efficient production of both off-the-shelf and personalized medical products that accommodate patient needs better than traditional manufacturing processes. In the field of orthopaedic surgery, 3D printing implants and instrumentation can be used to address a variety of pathologies that would otherwise be challenging to manage with products made from traditional subtractive manufacturing. Furthermore, 3D bioprinting has significantly impacted bone and cartilage restoration procedures and has the potential to completely transform how we treat patients with debilitating musculoskeletal injuries. Although costs can be high, as technology advances, the economics of 3D printing will improve, especially as the benefits of this technology have clearly been demonstrated in both orthopaedic surgery and medicine as a whole. This review outlines the basics of 3D printing technology and its current applications in orthopaedic surgery and ends with a brief summary of 3D bioprinting and its potential future impact.

Not All Robotic-assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Are the Same

Because value in healthcare has shifted to a measurement of quality relative to the cost, a greater emphasis exists on improving clinical and functional outcomes and patient satisfaction. Despite advances in implant design, surgical technique, and postoperative rehabilitation, multiple studies demonstrate that nearly 20% of patients remain dissatisfied with their overall outcomes after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Because implant positioning, alignment, and equal soft-tissue balance are critical for a successful TKA, malalignment in the coronal, sagittal, and rotational planes continue to increase failure rates and cause poor clinical outcomes. Robotic-assisted TKA has gained momentum within the past 10 years to better control surgical variables by mitigating technical errors caused by insecure cutting guides and imprecise bone cuts. Contemporary robotic platforms have evolved along with our ability to collect high-quality patient-reported outcome measures data, and this combination is proving the clinical effectiveness. This comprehensive review investigates the advent of robotic-assisted TKA including advantages, disadvantages, historical, and commercially available newer generation systems, clinical outcomes, and cost analysis to better understand the potential added value of this technology.

Single Use Instruments for Implanting a Contemporary Total Knee Arthroplasty System Are Accurate, Efficient, and Safe

BACKGROUND

Single use instruments (SUI) is a potential mechanism to improve efficiency and reduce cost in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). New technology requires patient safety and surgical accuracy. A multi-center study of SUI vs reusable mechanical instrumentation (RUI) for a TKA system compared implant placement accuracy and operating room (OR) efficiency.

METHODS

Four surgeons implanted 88 primary TKAs, N = 44 RUI and N = 44 SUI. Accuracy was measured radiographically at 3 months. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of absolute value of mechanical axis alignment. Radiographic endpoints, OR times, and adverse events were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy-five subjects completed the study (41 SUI/34 RUI). The primary endpoint non-inferiority of SUI vs RUI was met, with no significant difference between SUI and RUI in most radiographic parameters (distal femoral varus-valgus, proximal tibial varus-valgus, tibial slope, or subjects within 3° of target); there was a slight difference in femoral component flexion angle (P = .015). SUI and RUI mean (SD) OR set-up times were 18.8 (10.03) and 26.7 (6.93) (P <.001), and surgical times (first incision to last stitch) were 64.6 (16.95) and 60.5 (19.01) (P = .295), respectively. Differences in OR clean-down and anesthesia were not significant. There were no revisions, and there was no significant difference in the number of reported adverse events.

CONCLUSION

SUI resulted in similar accuracy of implant placement to RUI with decreased OR set-up time and no increase in adverse events. These results support the safety and efficacy of SUI for performing TKA. Further analysis of potential economic and technical advantages is warranted.

A novel augmented reality-based surgical guidance system for total knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Many of the functional complications that arise after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are caused by a non-optimal balance of the knee after surgery. Over the past 20 years, technology has been used in the Operating Room (OR) to help improve precision and balance. The results of Computer-Assisted Surgery (CAS) and robotic systems show improved accuracy regarding implant positioning but a relatively small improvement in patient-reported outcomes and implant survival compared to conventional TKA. Recently, Augmented Reality (AR) has been proposed as a technology that could improve accuracy in orthopaedic surgery, providing a more efficient and cost-effective solution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This article describes a novel AR-based surgical guidance system that measures intra-operatively the effect of prosthesis alignment and positioning on soft tissue balance. The system is integrated in a pair of smart glasses and two small sensors and displays surgical targets directly in the field of view of the surgeon.

RESULTS

The system has been used in a limited number of cases. While the preliminary experience has been positive, clinical research is ongoing to confirm to confirm the performance of the system and the impact on clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Augmented Reality can be a valuable tool to improve accuracy in TKA. The use of smart glasses and integrated sensors improves the efficiency of the procedure, particularly when coupled with single-use instrumentation. A novel protocol for soft tissue assessment allows for a 3-dimensional evaluation of the ligaments and a better measurement of the effect of tibial rotation.

Implant contamination as a cause of surgical site infection in spinal surgery: are single-use implants a reasonable solution? - a systematic review

Background

In spine surgery, surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the main perioperative complications and is associated with a higher patient morbidity and longer patient hospitalization. Most factors associated with SSI are connected with asepsis during the surgical procedure and thus with contamination of implants and instruments used which can be caused by pre- and intraoperative factors. In this systematic review we evaluate the current literature on these causes and discuss possible solutions to avoid implant and instrument contamination.

Methods

A systematic literature search of PubMed addressing implant, instrument and tray contamination in orthopaedic and spinal surgery from 2001 to 2019 was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. All studies regarding implant and instrument contamination in orthopaedic surgery published in English language were included.

Results

Thirty-five studies were eligible for inclusion and were divided into pre- and intraoperative causes for implant and instrument contamination. Multiple studies showed that reprocessing of medical devices for surgery may be insufficient and lead to surgical site contamination. Regarding intraoperative causes, contamination of gloves and gowns as well as contamination via air are the most striking factors contributing to microbial contamination.

Conclusions

Our systematic literature review shows that multiple factors can lead to instrument or implant contamination. Intraoperative causes of contamination can be avoided by implementing behavior such as changing gloves right before handling an implant and reducing the instruments’ intraoperative exposure to air. In avoidance of preoperative contamination, there still is a lack of convincing evidence for the use of single-use implants in orthopaedic surgery.

The Accuracy of 3D Printing Assistance in the Spinal Deformity Surgery

Background

The pedicle screw is one of the main tools used in spinal deformity correction surgery. Robotic and navigated surgeries are usually used, and they provide superior accuracy in pedicle screw placement than free-hand and fluoroscopy-guided techniques. However, their high cost and space limitation are problematic. We provide a new solution using 3D printing technology to facilitate spinal deformity surgery.

Methods

A workflow was developed to assist spinal deformity surgery using 3D printing technology. The trajectory and profile of pedicle screws were determined on the image system by the surgical team. The engineering team designed drill templates based on the bony surface anatomy and the trajectory of pedicle screws. Their effectiveness and safety were evaluated during a preoperative simulation surgery. The surgery consisted in making a pilot hole through the drill template on a computed tomography- (CT-) based, full-scale 3D spine model for every planned segment. Somatosensory evoke potential (SSEP) and motor evoke potential (MEP) were used for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. Postoperative CT was obtained 6 months after the correction surgery to confirm the screw accuracy.

Results

From July 2015 to November 2016, we performed 10 spinal deformity surgeries with 3D printing technology assistance. In total, 173 pedicle screws were implanted using drill templates. No notable change in SSEP and MEP or neurologic deficit was noted. Based on postoperative CT scans, the acceptable rate was 97.1% (168/173). We recorded twelve pedicle screws with medial breach, six with lateral breach, and five with inferior breach. Medial breach (12/23) was the main type of penetration. Lateral breach occurred mostly in the concave side (5/6). Most penetrations occurred above the T8 level (69.6%, 16/23).

Conclusion

3D printing technology provides an effective alternative for spinal deformity surgery when expensive medical equipment, such as intraoperative navigation and robotic systems, is unavailable.