Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Improved positioning of the tibial component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with patient-specific cutting blocks

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

Abstract

Purpose

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has recently regained popularity for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. Numerous authors have cited alignment as an important prognostic factor in the survival of UKA. Limb alignment affects not only the longevity of UKA by influencing wear of polyethylene, but also affects the unreplaced contralateral compartment. Malpositioning of the components may result in unequal wear patterns, thus further leading to early failure and additionally influencing clinical outcome as well. However, there is a lack of techniques to assure a high accuracy of the implant positioning.

Methods

In this study, we investigated tibia component alignment of 28 medial UKAs implanted with patient-specific cutting blocks. Three patients were excluded due to bad imaging. Measurements of tibial component alignment from postoperatively computed tomography (CT) scans were compared to respective CT-based preoperative plannings to assess the accuracy of implant positioning.

Results

Our results show excellent high accuracy of tibial implant position in tibial varus/valgus (Δ 0.3° ± 1.7°), posterior slope (Δ 1.1° ± 2.6°) and external rotation (Δ 1.5° ± 3.3°).

Conclusion

We conclude that patient-specific cutting blocks improve the accuracy of tibia component positioning in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Level of evidence

Case series with no comparison group, Level IV.

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
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ackroyd CE (2003) Medial compartment arthroplasty of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(7):937–942

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Campbell DG, Johnson LJ, West SC (2006) Multiparameter quantitative computer-assisted tomography assessment of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties. ANZ J Surg 76(9):782–787

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cobb J, Henckel J, Gomes P, Harris S, Jakopec M, Rodriguez F, Barrett A, Davies B (2006) Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(2):188–197

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Diezi C, Wirth S, Meyer DC, Koch PP (2010) Effect of femoral to tibial varus mismatch on the contact area of unicondylar knee prostheses. Knee 17(5):350–355

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dunbar NJ, Roche MW, Park BH, Branch SH, Conditt MA, Banks SA (2012) Accuracy of dynamic tactile-guided unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 27(5):803–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Engh GA, Dwyer KA, Hanes CK (1992) Polyethylene wear of metal-backed tibial components in total and unicompartmental knee prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74(1):9–17

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A(3):506–511

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:161–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hernigou P, Poignard A, Filippini P, Zilber S (2008) Retrieved unicompartmental implants with full pe tibial components: the effects of knee alignment and polyethylene thickness on creep and wear. Open Orthop J 2:51–56

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Koch PP, Müller D, Pisan M, Fucentese SF (2013) Radiographic accuracy in TKA with a CT-based patient-specific cutting block technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(10):2200–2205

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Koeck FX, Beckmann J, Luring C, Rath B, Grifka J, Basad E (2011) Evaluation of implant position and knee alignment after patient-specific unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 18(5):294–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lustig S, Scholes CJ, Oussedik SI, Kinzel V, Coolican MR, Parker DA (2013) Unsatisfactory accuracy as determined by computer navigation of VISIONNAIRE patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 28(3):469–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mariani EM, Bourne MH, Jackson RT, Jackson ST, Jones P (2007) Early failure of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 22(6 Suppl 2):81–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Martinez-Carranza N, Weidenhielm L, Crafoord J, Hedstrom M (2012) Deviation between navigated and final 3-dimensional implant position in mini-invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a pilot study in 13 patients. Acta Orthop 83(6):625–628

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Noticewala MS, Geller JA, Lee JH, Macaulay W (2012) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty relieves pain and improves function more than total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 27(8 Suppl):99–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. O’Rourke MR, Gardner JJ, Callaghan JJ, Liu SS, Goetz DD, Vittetoe DA, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC (2005) The John Insall Award: unicompartmental knee replacement. A minimum twenty-one-year follow-up, end-result study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:27–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Servien E, Fary C, Lustig S, Demey G, Saffarini M, Chomel S, Neyret P (2011) Tibial component rotation assessment using CT scan in medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 97(3):272–275

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. SooHoo NF, Sharifi H, Kominski G, Lieberman JR (2006) Cost-effectiveness analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty as an alternative to total knee arthroplasty for unicompartmental osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(9):1975–1982

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Stronach BM, Pelt CE, Erickson J, Peters CL (2013) Patient-specific total knee arthroplasty required frequent surgeon-directed changes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(1):169–174

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Swienckowski JJ, Pennington DW (2004) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients sixty years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A Suppl 1(Pt 2):131–142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Valenzuela GA, Jacobson NA, Geist DJ, Valenzuela RG, Teitge RA (2013) Implant and limb alignment outcomes for conventional and navigated unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 28(3):463–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Weber P, Crispin A, Schmidutz F, Utzschneider S, Pietschmann MF, Jansson V, Müller PE (2013) Improved accuracy in computer-assisted unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(11):2453–2461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare a financial and inventor relationship with Medacta® Switzerland.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Bürgerspital Solothurn, Schöngrünstrasse 42, 4500, Solothurn, Switzerland

    M. L. Dao Trong, C. Diezi & N. Helmy

  2. Department of Radiology, Bürgerspital Solothurn, Schöngrünstrasse 42, 4500, Solothurn, Switzerland

    G. Goerres

Authors
  1. M. L. Dao Trong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Diezi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. Goerres
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. Helmy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. L. Dao Trong.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dao Trong, M.L., Diezi, C., Goerres, G. et al. Improved positioning of the tibial component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with patient-specific cutting blocks. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23, 1993–1998 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-2839-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-2839-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation