ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2018
Patient-specific instrumentation in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is reliable and accurate except for the tibial rotation.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-specific vs. Oxford microplasty instrumentation in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of medical research · 2025Trial
- Patient-specific instruments do not show advantage over conventional instruments in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at 2 year follow-up: a prospective, two-centre, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Trial
- Patient-Specific Instrumentation Improves Technical Execution Accuracy After Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Preoperative Planning in Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Three dimensional printing in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: current evidence and future directions.International orthopaedics · 2026Review
- ACL tunnel placement using 3D printed surgical guides - a porcine feasibility study.3D printing in medicine · 2025Article
- Applications and accuracy of 3D-printed surgical guides in traumatology and orthopaedic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Predictability of implant sizes during cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty using an image-free hand-held robotic system.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- [New technologies (robotics, "custom-made") for unicondylar knee arthroplasty-contra].Der Orthopade · 2021Review
- Patient-specific instrumentation does not improve tibial component coronal alignment for medial UKA compared to conventional instrumentation.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2020Article
- Implant placement accuracy in total knee arthroplasty: validation of a CT-based measurement technique.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePatient-specific instrumentation (PSI) is a technique to plan and position the prosthesis components in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) surgery. This study assesses whether the definitive component position in the frontal, sagittal and axial plane is according to the preoperative plan, based on the hypothesis that PSI is accurate.
methodsTwenty-six patients who had PSI Oxford UKA surgery were included prospectively. The component position in vivo was determined with a postoperative CT-scan and compared with the planned component position using MRI-based digital 3D imaging. Adjustments to the preoperative plan and implanted component sizes during surgery were recorded.
resultsIntraoperatively, no femoral adjustments were performed; 12 tibial re-resections were necessary. The median absolute deviation from the plan in degrees (range) in the frontal, sagittal and axial plane was 1.8° (- 1.5°-6.5°), 2.0° (- 6.5°-8.0°) and 1.0° (- 1.5°-5.0°) for the femoral component, and 2.5° (- 1.0°-6.0°), 3.0° (- 1.0°-5.0°) and 5.0° (- 6.5°-12.5°) for the tibial component. The femoral component is positioned 0.5 (- 1°-2.5°) mm more lateral and 0.8 (- 1.0°-2.5°) mm more anterior. The tibial component is positioned 2.0 (- 5.0-0.0) mm more lateral and 1.3 (- 3.0-6.0) mm more distal. The femoral and tibial default plans were changed four times (15.4%) and nine times (34.6%), respectively, before approval by the surgeon.
conclusionPSI in Oxford UKA surgery is reliable and accurately translates the preoperative plan into the in vivo situation, except for the tibial rotational position. The preoperative planning is a crucial step in avoiding re-resections that can cause angular deviations in prosthesis position, especially in tibial component rotational position. It is advised to avoid re-resections and to consider this while planning the PSI procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective comparative study Level II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29282486What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.