Image-guided techniques improve accuracy of mosaic arthroplasty
- 437 Downloads
Mosaic arthroplasty is a surgical technique in which a set of cylindrical osteochondral grafts is transplanted from non-load-bearing areas of the joint to repair damaged articular cartilage. Incongruity between the graft surface and the adjacent cartilage at the repair site results in inferior clinical outcomes. This paper compares technical outcome using three mosaic arthroplasty techniques (conventional, optoelectronic, and patient-specific template) on femur models.
Three distinct sets of femur models with defects were created. Preoperatively, the harvest and delivery sites were planned using custom software. Five orthopedic surgeons were recruited; each surgeon performed each of the three surgical techniques on each of the three bone models with defect. During the optoelectronic trials, the instrument position and orientation were tracked and superimposed onto the surgical plan. For the patient-specific template trials, plastic templates were manufactured to fit over the defects with cylindrical holes to guide the surgical tools according to the plan. Postoperatively, the femur models were computer tomography and laser scanned. Several measures were made to compare surgical techniques: operative time; surface congruency; defect coverage; graft surface area that is proud or recessed; air volume below the grafts; and distance and angle of the grafts from the surgical plan.
The patient-specific template and optoelectronic techniques resulted in improved surface congruency, defect surface coverage, and below-graft air gap volume in comparison with the conventional technique. However, the conventional technique had a shorter operative time.
Image-guided techniques can improve the accuracy of mosaic arthroplasty, which could result in better clinical outcomes.
KeywordsImage-guided surgery Patient-specific templates Mosaic arthroplasty Autologous osteochondral grafting
The authors are grateful to Paul St. John, HMRC (Human Mobility Research Centre, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada) and all the participating surgeons and residents. This research was supported by Grant STPGP 385959 from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada and Canadian Institute of Health Research.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors confirm that there are no known conflict of interest associated with this publication.
The study described in this manuscript was approved by the Queen’s University Health Sciences & Affiliated Teaching Hospitals Research Ethics Board. All participants provided their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study.
- 7.Huang FS, Simonian PT, Norman AG, Clark JM (2004) Effects of small incongruities in a sheep model of osteochondral autografting. Am J Sports Med 32(8):1842–1848. doi: 10.1177/0363546504264895
- 8.Kosel J, Giouroudi I, Scheffer C, Dillon E, Erasmus P (2010) Anatomical study of the radius and center of curvature of the distal femoral condyle. J Biomech Eng 132(9):091002-1–091002-6. doi: 10.1115/1.4002061
- 10.Di Benedetto P, Citak M, Kendoff D, O’Loughlin PF, Suero EM, Pearle AD, Koulalis D (2012) Arthroscopic mosaicplasty for osteochondral lesions of the knee: computer-assisted navigation versus freehand technique. Arthroscopy 28(9):1290–1296. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.02.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Toyoshima T, Nagamune K, Araki D, Matsumoto T, Kubo S, Matsushita T, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M (2011) A development of navigation system for mosaic plasty using electromagnetic sensor. FUZZ-IEEE 2011 IEEE International Conference, pp 1447–1452, doi: 10.1109/FUZZY.2011.6007593
- 12.Toyoshima T, Nagamune K, Araki D, Matsumoto T, Kubo S, Matsushita T, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M (2012) A development of navigation system with image segmentation in mosaicplasty of the knee. FUZZ-IEEE, 2012 IEEE International Conference, pp 1–6, doi: 10.1109/FUZZ-IEEE.2012.6251338
- 13.Brzeczko AW, Goldberg RP, Taylor RH, Evans P (2001) Smart alignment tool for knee mosaicplasty surgery. In: medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention MICCAI 2001, vol 2208. Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 599–605. doi: 10.1007/3-540-45468-3_72
- 14.Kunz M, Devlin SM, Hurtig MB, Waldman SD, Rudan JF, Bardana DD, Stewart AJ (2013) Image-guided techniques improve the short-term outcome of autologous osteochondral cartilage repair surgeries: an animal trial. Cartilage 4(2):153–164. doi: 10.1177/1947603512470683 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Inoue J, Kunz M, Hurtig M, Waldman S, Stewart J (2011) Automated planning of computer assisted mosaic arthroplasty. In: medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention MICCAI 2011, vol 6891. Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 267–74. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-23623-5_34
- 17.Kunz M, Devlin S, Gong RH, Inoue J, Waldman SD, Hurtig M, Abolmaesumi P, Stewart J (2009) Prediction of the repair surface over cartilage defects: a comparison of three methods in a sheep model. In: medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention MICCAI 2009, vol 5761. Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 75–82. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-04268-3_10
- 18.Hangody L, Karpati Z (1994) A new surgical treatment of localized cartilaginous defects in the knee. Hung J Orthop Trauma 37:237–242Google Scholar