Patient-specific cruciate-retaining total knee replacement with individualized implants and instruments (iTotal™ CR G2)
- PMID: 33289871
- DOI: 10.1007/s00064-020-00690-8
Patient-specific cruciate-retaining total knee replacement with individualized implants and instruments (iTotal™ CR G2)
Abstract
Objective: Treatment of tricompartimental osteoarthritis (OA) using customized instruments and implants for cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. Use of patient-specific instruments and implants (ConforMIS iTotalTM CR G2) together with a 3D-planning protocol (iView®). Retropatellar resurfacing is optional.
Indications: Symptomatic tricompartmental OA of the knee (Kellgren-Lawrence stage IV) with preserved posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) after unsuccessful conservative or joint-preserving surgical treatment.
Contraindications: Knee ligament instabilities of the posterior cruciate or collateral ligaments. Infection. Relative contraindication: knee deformities >15° (varus, valgus, flexion); prior partial knee replacement.
Surgical technique: Midline or parapatellar medial skin incision, medial arthrotomy; distal femoral resection with patient-specific cutting block; tibial resection using either a cutting jig for the anatomic slope or a fixed 5° slope. Balancing the knee in extension and flexion gap using patient-specific spacer. The final tibial preparation achieved with gap-balanced placement of the femoral cutting jigs. Kinematic testing using anatomic trial components. Final implant components are cemented in extension. Wound layers are sutured. Drainage is optional.
Postoperative management: Sterile wound dressing; compressive bandage. No limitation of the active and passive range of motion. Optional partial weight bearing during the first 2 weeks, then transition to full weight bearing. Follow-up directly after surgery, at 12 and 52 weeks, then every 1-2 years.
Results: Overall 60 patients with tricompartmental knee OA and preserved PCL were treated. Mean age was 66 (range 45-76) years. Minimum follow-up was 12 months. There was 1 septic revision after a low-grade infection, 1 reoperation to replace the patellar due to patellar osteoarthritis and 3 manipulations under anesthesia (MUAs) to increase range of motion. Radiographic analyses demonstrated an ideal implant fit with less than 2 mm subsidence or overhang. The WOMAC score improved from 154.8 points preoperatively to 83.5 points at 1 year and 59.3 points at 2 years postoperatively. The EuroQol-5D Score also improved from 11.1 points preoperatively to 7.7 points at 1 year postoperatively.
Zusammenfassung: ZIEL: Kreuzbanderhaltende Knietotalendoprothese bei Patienten mit Pangonarthrose mittels medialer Arthrotomie. Verwendung patientenspezifischer Instrumente und Implantate (ConforMIS iTotalTM CR G2) mit 3‑D-Planungsprotokoll (iView®). Retropatellarersatz ist optional möglich.
Indikation: Symptomatische Pangonarthrose (nach Kellgren und Lawrence Stadium IV) mit erhaltenem hinterem Kreuzband (HKB) nach erfolgloser konservativer und/oder operativer gelenkerhaltender Therapie.
Kontraindikation: Kniebandinstabilitäten des hinteren Kreuzbands oder der Seitenbänder. Infektion. Relative Kontraindikation: Kniedeformitäten >15° (Varus, Valgus, Streckdefizit) und/oder vorangegangener Teilgelenkersatz.
Operationstechnik: Mittige oder medial parapatellare Hautinzision, mediale Arthrotomie. Distale femorale Resektion mit patientenspezifischem Schneideblock; Tibiaresektion mit einem Schneideblock, der einen anatomischen oder einen fixen tibialen Slope von 5° enthält. Balancierung des Kniegelenks in Streckung und Beugung mit individuell angepassten Balancierungshilfen. Finale balancierte Femurpräparation mit individuellen femoralen Schneideblöcken. Kinematische Prüfung mit anatomischen Probekomponenten. Die abschließende Tibiapräparation erfolgt mittels individueller Bohrschablone. Die finalen Implantatkomponenten werden in Streckstellung einzementiert. Schichtweiser Wundverschluss. Die Einlage einer Drainage ist optional.
Postoperatives management: Sterile Wundauflagen und elastokompressive Wickelung. Keine Limitierung des aktiven und passiven Bewegungsausmaßes. Eine Teilbelastung für die ersten 2 Wochen postoperativ ist optional, bevor der Übergang zur Vollbelastung erfolgt. Verlaufskontrollen direkt postoperativ, nach 12 und 52 Wochen, danach alle 1 bis 2 Jahre.
Ergebnisse: Behandelt wurden 60 Patienten mit Pangonarthrose und erhaltenem HKB. Durchschnittsalter: 66 (45–76) Jahre. Nachuntersuchungszeit mindestens 12 Monate. Es gab eine Revision nach einer Low-grade-Infektion, eine Reoperation zur Behandlung einer Retropatellararthrose mit Retropatellarersatz und 3 Narkosemobilisationen zur Verbesserung der Beweglichkeit. Röntgenkontrollen zeigten durchweg eine ideale Implantatpassform mit weniger als 2 mm Implantatüber- oder -unterstand. Der WOMAC-Gesamtscore verbesserte sich von 154,8 Punkten präoperativ auf 83,5 Punkte nach einem Jahr und auf 59,3 Punkte nach 2 Jahren postoperativ. Auch der EuroQol-5D-Score verbesserte sich von 11,1 Punkten präoperativ auf 7,7 Punkte postoperativ.
Keywords: Arthroplasty, replacement, knee; Collateral ligaments; Personalized medicine; Posterior cruciate ligament; Tricompartmental knee osteoarthritis.
Similar articles
-
[Individualized unicondylar knee replacement : Use of patient-specific implants and instruments].Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2017 Feb;29(1):31-39. doi: 10.1007/s00064-017-0485-9. Epub 2017 Jan 31. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2017. PMID: 28144717 Clinical Trial. German.
-
Bicompartmental individualized knee replacement : Use of patient-specific implants and instruments (iDuo™).Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2017 Feb;29(1):51-58. doi: 10.1007/s00064-017-0484-x. Epub 2017 Jan 31. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2017. PMID: 28144716 Clinical Trial. English.
-
Cementless, Cruciate-Retaining Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Conventional Instrumentation: Technical Pearls and Intraoperative Considerations.JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2024 Sep 13;14(3):e23.00036. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.23.00036. eCollection 2024 Jul-Sep. JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2024. PMID: 39280965 Free PMC article.
-
Kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty.Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2021 Dec;33(6):525-537. doi: 10.1007/s00064-021-00729-4. Epub 2021 Aug 19. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2021. PMID: 34414467 Review. English.
-
[Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty - a challenge].Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2017 Feb;29(1):17-30. doi: 10.1007/s00064-016-0476-2. Epub 2016 Dec 12. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2017. PMID: 27957592 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Robotic-assisted differential total knee arthroplasty with patient-specific implants: surgical techniques and preliminary results.Arthroplasty. 2024 Jun 10;6(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s42836-024-00255-1. Arthroplasty. 2024. PMID: 38853256 Free PMC article.
-
Satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective matched-pair analysis of patients with customised individually made and off-the-shelf implants.Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023 Dec;31(12):5873-5884. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07643-1. Epub 2023 Nov 20. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023. PMID: 37982843 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical and Radiological Outcomes after Knee Arthroplasty with Patient-Specific versus Off-the-Shelf Knee Implants: A Systematic Review.J Pers Med. 2021 Jun 22;11(7):590. doi: 10.3390/jpm11070590. J Pers Med. 2021. PMID: 34206259 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Improved Knee Function with Customized vs. Off-the-Shelf TKA Implants-Results of a Single-Surgeon, Single-Center, Single-Blinded Study.J Pers Med. 2023 Aug 14;13(8):1257. doi: 10.3390/jpm13081257. J Pers Med. 2023. PMID: 37623507 Free PMC article.
-
The Impact of Total Knee Replacement with a Customized Cruciate-Retaining Implant Design on Patient-Reported and Functional Outcomes.J Pers Med. 2022 Jan 31;12(2):194. doi: 10.3390/jpm12020194. J Pers Med. 2022. PMID: 35207682 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KDJ (2010) Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop 468:57–63 - DOI
-
- Parvizi J, Nunley RM, Berend KR et al (2014) High level of residual symptoms in young patients after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 472:133–137 - DOI
-
- Leszko F, Hovinga KR, Lerner AL, Komistek RD, Mahfouz MR (2011) In vivo normal knee kinematics: is ethnicity or gender an influencing factor? Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:95–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1517-z - DOI - PubMed
-
- Puthumanapully PK, Harris SJ, Leong A, Cobb JP, Amis AA, Jeffers J (2014) A morphometric study of normal and varus knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:2891–2899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3337-2 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Thienpont E, Schwab PE, Fennema P (2017) Efficacy of patient-specific instruments in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:521–530. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.16.00496 - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous