title: Implant positioning in TKA: comparison between conventional and patient-specific instrumentation.
abstract: The number of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures continuously increases, with good to excellent results. In the last few years, new surgical techniques have been developed to improve prosthesis positioning. In this context, patient-specific instrumentation is included. The goal of this study was to compare the perioperative parameters and the spatial positioning of prosthetic components in TKA procedures performed with patient-specific instrumentation vs traditional TKA. In this prospective comparative randomized study, 15 patients underwent TKA with 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) preoperative planning (patient-specific instrumentation group) and 15 patients underwent traditional TKA (non-patient-specific instrumentation group). All patients underwent postoperative computed tomography (CT) examination. In the patient-specific instrumentation group, preoperative data planning regarding femoral and tibial bone resection was correlated with intraoperative measurements. Surgical time, length of hospitalization, and intraoperative and postoperative bleeding were compared between the 2 groups. Positioning of implants on postoperative CT was assessed for both groups. Data planned with 3-dimensional MRI regarding the depth of bone cuts showed good to excellent correlation with intraoperative measurements. The patient-specific instrumentation group showed better perioperative outcomes and good correlation between the spatial positioning of prosthetic components planned preoperatively and that seen on postoperative CT. Less variability was found in the patient-specific instrumentation group than in the non-patient-specific instrumentation group in spatial orientation of prosthetic components. Preoperative planning with 3-dimensional MRI in TKA has a better perioperative outcome compared with the traditional method. Use of patient-specific instrumentation can also improve the spatial positioning of both prosthetic components.
authors.forename: Ferdinando
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Ferrara
authors.forename: Antonio
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Cipriani
authors.forename: Nicola
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Magarelli
authors.forename: Santi
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Rapisarda
authors.forename: Vincenzo
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: De Santis
authors.forename: Aaron
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Burrofato
authors.forename: Antonio
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Leone
authors.forename: Lorenzo
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Bonomo
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D019645:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional; D007719:Knee Joint / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D007720:Knee Prosthesis; D007902:Length of Stay; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D061646:Operative Time; D011182:Postoperative Care; D011300:Preoperative Care; D011446:Prospective Studies; D017755:Prosthesis Fitting / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods*; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed