Patient-Specific Instrument Can Improve Functional and Radiographic Results during Learning Curve for Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (02) ◽  
pp. 180-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose Matas-Diez ◽  
Esther Carbo-Laso ◽  
Ruben Perez-Mañanes ◽  
Javier Vaquero-Martín ◽  
Pablo Sanz-Ruiz
Keyword(s):  
Learning Curve ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Radiographic Outcome ◽  
Conventional Procedure ◽  
True Value ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Specific Instrumentation

AbstractThe true value of use of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) systems by inexperienced surgeons during their learning curve to improve the clinical and radiographic outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has not been previously studied. Fifty patients with a mean age of 64.3 years undergoing surgery for Oxford UKA were prospectively divided into two groups. Twenty-five patients were operated on by a surgeon with no prior experience in UKA using a PSI system and the other 25 patients by an experienced surgeon using a conventional procedure. Patients were scored using joint range of motion (ROM), the Knee Society Score (KSS), the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the 12-item Short-Form (SF-12) before and 3 months and 2 years after surgery. Impact of use of PSI was measured by comparing clinical and radiographic outcome, complications, and implant survival. No evidence of poorer clinical outcome was seen in any subscale of KSS, KOOS, and SF-12 for inexperienced surgeons using PSI (p = 0.45, p = 0.32, and p = 0.61, respectively). No difference was found between the two procedures in precision of radiographic alignment of components (p = 0.53). No complication occurred in any group. PSI may improve precision of component alignment during the learning curve of surgeons, thus achieving functional results similar to those of more experienced surgeons using a conventional procedure.

scholarly journals 3D printing and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 248-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth G. Jones ◽  
Susannah Clarke ◽  
Martin Jaere ◽  
Justin Cobb
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Specific Instrumentation ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Total Knee

In suitable patients, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) offers a number of advantages compared with total knee arthroplasty. However, the procedure is technically demanding, with a small tolerance for error. Assistive technology has the potential to improve the accuracy of implant positioning. This review paper describes the concept of detailed UKA planning in 3D, and the 3D printing technology that enables a plan to be delivered intraoperatively using patient-specific instrumentation (PSI). The varying guide designs that enable accurate registration are discussed and described. The system accuracy is reported. Future studies need to ascertain whether accuracy for low-volume surgeons can be delivered in the operating theatre using PSI, and reflected in improved patient reported outcome measures, and lower revision rates.Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180001

scholarly journals TRENDS IN UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmet Nadir Aydemir ◽  
Mehmet Yucens
Keyword(s):  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Specific Level ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Specific Instrumentation ◽  
Thomson Reuters

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate trends in publications on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) from the past to the present. Methods: As a web-based analysis, all UKA research articles, editorial letters, case reports, reviews and meeting abstracts published on the Thomson Reuters’ Web of Knowledge were evaluated. The period from the first publication in 1980 to January 2019 was divided into four decades and publications were evaluated. Research articles were grouped into headings according to the subjects. Results: A total of 1,658 publications were evaluated in this study. The most frequent term used in the publications title was “outcome,” with 260 items, followed by “biomechanics and kinematics,” with 99 items. Most reports have been published in the last decade, and the most common type of publication was postoperative follow-up and results. Conclusion: In parallel with technological advancements, publications related to UKA-especially patient-specific instrumentation, navigation, and robotic surgery-will increase in number and become more specific. Level of Evidence V, Expert Opinion.

Role of alignment in successful clinical outcomes following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: current concepts

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 224-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie C Petterson ◽  
Travis D Blood ◽  
Kevin D Plancher
Keyword(s):  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Varus Deformity ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Specific Instrumentation ◽  
Alignment Correction ◽  
Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
The Impact

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has become increasingly more common, indicating the necessity to better understand factors that may impact outcomes and survivorship. Overcorrection or undercorrection of a varus deformity can increase the risk of postoperative complications including contralateral, lateral compartmental osteoarthritis, component loosening, and component wear following medial UKA. There is no general consensus on the amount of alignment correction to optimise outcomes. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the current literature related to alignment, intraoperative alignment correction, and the impact on outcomes and survivorship following medial UKA as well as to explore alternative surgical techniques including patient-specific instrumentation and robotic assistance when managing the varus-malaligned knee with medial UKA. Understanding each of these factors and how they interact is vital in providing patients with promising outcomes following UKA. The ideal alignment is unknown; however, the key is to avoid severe undercorrection and overcorrection of varus malalignment for superior outcomes following medial UKA.

scholarly journals Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Using Patient-Specific Instrumentation – Accuracy of Preoperative Planning, Time Saving and Cost Effectiveness

10.29007/n5l4 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gesine Seeber ◽  
Kristina Kolbow ◽  
Uwe Maus ◽  
Alexander Kluge ◽  
Djordje Lazovic
Keyword(s):  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Surgical Time ◽  
Time Saving ◽  
Planning Time ◽  
Operation Costs ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Specific Instrumentation ◽  
Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Since the past few years, patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been greatly publicized in knee endoprosthetics. Manufacturers propose advantages such as better accuracy of fit and reduction of both surgical time and operation costs due to pre- operative prosthesis planning. Whether these proposed advantages are achieved in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) remains unclear. This paper presents results from a retrospective analysis of 22 patients (24 knees) who were electively provided with a medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using patient- specific instrumentation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document