Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: simpler, faster and more accurate than standard instrumentation—a randomized controlled trial

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

This randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) to standard instrumentation regarding efficacy to achieve a good coronal alignment and differences in surgical time, blood loss and length of stay.

Methods

Ninety-five of 100 randomized patients eligible for total knee arthroplasty were analysed. PSI with magnetic resonance and long-leg radiograph was performed in 47 patients, while 48 patients received standard instrumentation. Primary outcome measure was coronal alignment, evaluated with long-leg radiograph. Deviation >3° varus/valgus was considered an outlier. Surgical time was compared from skin to skin. Length of stay was a post hoc analysis. Blood loss was evaluated comparing the number of blood units spent, fall in haemoglobin and haematocrit levels.

Results

Standard instrumentation had a higher number of outliers in the coronal alignment with a relative risk of 3.015, compared to PSI. Surgical time was reduced by 18 min (24.8 %) with the PSI, as well as length of stay, with a half-day reduction. Number of blood units spent was significantly less in the PSI group. Relative risk of transfusion was 7.09 for patients in the standard instrumentation group. Difference in Hg and Htc levels were not significant. No patient had to abandon PSI. Minor changes to preoperative plan occurred in 14.9 % of the patient: cut review in 4.3 % and insert change in 10.6 %.

Conclusions

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) is able to provide important advantages over standard instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: it lowers the risk of outliers and transfusion, is a faster procedure and enables a shorter length of stay with a low rate of intraoperative adjustments.

Level of evidence

I.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bae DK, Song SJ (2011) Computer assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 3:259

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Barke S, Musanhu E, Busch C, Stafford G, Field R (2013) Patient-matched total knee arthroplasty: Does it offer any clinical advantages? Acta Orthop Belg 79(3):307–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berger RA, Rosenberg AG, Barden RM, Sheinkop MB, Jacobs JJ, Galante JO (2001) Long-term followup of the Miller-Galante total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 58–67

  4. Boonen B, Schotanus MGM, Kerens B, van der Weegen W, van Drumpt RAM, Kort NP (2013) Intra-operative results and radiological outcome of conventional and patient-specific surgery in total knee arthroplasty: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:2206–2212

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Boonen B, Schotanus MGM, Kort NP (2012) Preliminary experience with the patient-specific templating total knee arthroplasty: 40 cases compared with a matched control group. Acta Orthop 83:387–393

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Burnett RSJ, Barrack RL (2013) Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty is currently of no proven clinical benefit: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:264–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chareancholvanich K, Narkbunnam R, Pornrattanamaneewong C (2013) A prospective randomised controlled study of patient-specific cutting guides compared with conventional instrumentation in total knee replacement. Bone Joint J 95-B:354–359

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen JY, Yeo SJ, Yew AKS, Tay DKJ, Chia S-L, Lo NN, Chin PL (2014) The radiological outcomes of patient-specific instrumentation versus conventional total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:630–635

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Choong PF, Dowsey MM, Stoney JD (2009) Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? Comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24:560–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chotanaphuti T, Wangwittayakul V, Khuangsirikul S, Foojareonyos T (2014) The accuracy of component alignment in custom cutting blocks compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty instrumentation: prospective control trial. Knee 21:185–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Conteduca F, Iorio R, Mazza D, Caperna L, Bolle G, Argento G, Ferretti A (2013) Evaluation of the accuracy of a patient-specific instrumentation by navigation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:2194–2199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Conteduca F, Iorio R, Mazza D, Caperna L, Bolle G, Argento G, Ferretti A (2012) Are MRI-based, patient matched cutting jigs as accurate as the tibial guides? Int Orthop 36:1589–1593

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Daniilidis K, Tibesku CO (2013) Frontal plane alignment after total knee arthroplasty using patient-specific instruments. Int Orthop 37:45–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Daniilidis K, Tibesku CO (2014) A comparison of conventional and patient-specific instruments in total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 38:503–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dossett HG, Swartz GJ, Estrada NA, LeFevre GW, Kwasman BG (2012) Kinematically versus mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 35(2):e160–e169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Emmerson KP, Moran CG, Pinder IM (1996) Survivorship analysis of the kinematic stabilizer total knee replacement: a 10- to 14-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 78:441–445

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ensini A, Timoncini A, Cenni F, Belvedere C, Fusai F, Leardini A, Giannini S (2014) Intra- and post-operative accuracy assessments of two different patient-specific instrumentation systems for total knee replacement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:621–629

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fang DM, Ritter MA, Davis KE (2009) Coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24:39–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hamilton WG, Parks NL, Saxena A (2013) Patient-specific instrumentation does not shorten surgical time: a prospective, randomized trial. J Arthroplasty 28:96–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA (1991) Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:709–714

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kurtz S (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg 89:780

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Longstaff LM, Sloan K, Stamp N, Scaddan M, Beaver R (2009) Good alignment after total knee arthroplasty leads to faster rehabilitation and better function. J Arthroplasty 24:570–578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. MacDessi SJ, Jang B, Harris IA, Wheatley E, Bryant C, Chen DB (2014) A comparison of alignment using patient specific guides, computer navigation and conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. Knee 21:406–409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ng VY, DeClaire JH, Berend KR, Gulick BC, Lombardi AV (2012) Improved accuracy of alignment with patient-specific positioning guides compared with manual instrumentation in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:99–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nicoll D, Rowley DI (2010) Internal rotational error of the tibial component is a major cause of pain after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92:1238–1244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Noble JW, Moore CA, Liu N (2012) The value of patient-matched instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 27:153–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Paternostre F, Schwab P-E, Thienpont E (2014) The difference between weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing alignment in patient-specific instrumentation planning. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:674–679

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Roh YW, Kim TW, Lee S, Seong SC, Lee MC (2013) Is TKA using patient-specific instruments comparable to conventional TKA? A randomized controlled study of one system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3988–3995

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM (2002) Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:7–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Skyttä ET, Haapamäki V, Koivikko M, Huhtala H, Remes V (2011) Reliability of the hip-to-ankle radiograph in determining the knee and implant alignment after total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg 77:329–335

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vessely MB, Whaley AL, Harmsen WS, Schleck CD, Berry DJ (2006) The Chitranjan Ranawat Award: long-term survivorship and failure modes of 1000 cemented condylar total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 452:28–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Victor J, Dujardin J, Vandenneucker H, Arnout N, Bellemans J (2014) Patient-specific guides do not improve accuracy in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:263–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Vundelinckx BJ, Bruckers L, De Mulder K, De Schepper J, Van Esbroeck G (2013) Functional and radiographic short-term outcome evaluation of the visionaire system, a patient-matched instrumentation system for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 28:964–970

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Woolson ST, Harris AHS, Wagner DW, Giori NJ (2014) Component alignment during total knee arthroplasty with use of standard or custom instrumentation: a randomized clinical trial using computed tomography for postoperative alignment measurement. J Bone Joint Surg 96:366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zihlmann MS, Stacoff A, Romero J, Quervain IK, Stüssi E (2005) Biomechanical background and clinical observations of rotational malalignment in TKA. Clin Biomech 20:661–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hospital Particular do Algarve, Hospital de Faro, Rua Alfredo Guisado, No. 14, Bloco 2, 6º E, 1500-030, Lisbon, Portugal

    João Vide

  2. Hospital Particular do Algarve, Hospital de Faro, Urb. Casal de Gambelas, Lote 2, Gambelas, 8005-226, Faro, Portugal

    Tânia Pinto Freitas & Acácio Ramos

  3. Hospital Particular do Algarve, Urb. Casal de Gambelas, Lote 2, Gambelas, 8005-226, Faro, Portugal

    Henrique Cruz & João Paulo Sousa

Authors
  1. João Vide
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tânia Pinto Freitas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Acácio Ramos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Henrique Cruz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. João Paulo Sousa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to João Vide.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vide, J., Freitas, T.P., Ramos, A. et al. Patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: simpler, faster and more accurate than standard instrumentation—a randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25, 2616–2621 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3869-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3869-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation