Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29453487›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2018

Significant differences between manufacturer and surgeon in the accuracy of final component size prediction with CT-based patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty.

Davide Cucchi, Alessandra Menon, Riccardo Compagnoni, Paolo Ferrua, Chiara Fossati, Pietro Randelli

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. What future in the treatment of osteochondral knee defects?Annals of translational medicine · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Davide CucchiDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, 53127, Bonn, Germany. d.cucchi@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6284-7977
Alessandra MenonLaboratory of Applied Biomechanics, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo CompagnoniU.O.C. 1a Divisione, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Centro Specialistico Ortopedico Traumatologico Gaetano Pini-CTO, Piazza Cardinal Ferrari 1, 20122, Milan, Italy.
Paolo FerruaS.S.D. Chirurgia Articolare del Ginocchio, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Centro Specialistico Ortopedico Traumatologico Gaetano Pini-CTO, Piazza Cardinal Ferrari 1, 20122, Milan, Italy.
Chiara FossatiLaboratory of Applied Biomechanics, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy.
Pietro RandelliLaboratory of Applied Biomechanics, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy.
University of Milan · ITIstituto Ortopedico Gaetano Pini · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatient-specific instrumentation (PSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may improve component sizing. Little has been reported about accuracy of the default plan created by the manufacturer, especially for CT-based PSI. The goal of this study was to evaluate the reliability of this plan and the impact of the surgeon's changes on the final accuracy of the guide sizes.

methodsForty-five patients eligible for primary TKA were prospectively enrolled. The planned implant sizes were prospectively recorded from the initial manufacturer's proposal and from the final plan adjusted in light of the surgeon's evaluation; these two sizes where then compared to the actually implanted sizes. Fisher's exact test was used to test differences for categorical variables. Agreement between pre-operative plans and final implant was evaluated with the Bland-Altman method.

resultsThe manufacturer's proposal differed from the final implant in 9 (20.0%) femoral and 23 (51.1%) tibial components, while the surgeon's plan in 6 (13.3%, femoral) and 12 (26.7%, tibial). Modifications in the pre-operative plan were carried out for five (11.1%) femoral and 23 (51.1%) tibial components (p = 0.03). Appropriate modification occurred in 22 (88.0%) and 19 (76.0%) cases of femoral and tibial changes. The agreement between the manufacturer's and the surgeon's pre-operative plans was poor, especially with regard to tibial components.

conclusionThe surgeon's accuracy in predicting the final component size was significantly different from that of the manufacturer and changes in the initial manufacturer's plan were necessary to get an accurate pre-operative plan of the implant sizes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Careful evaluation of the initial manufacturer's plan by an experienced knee surgeon is mandatory when planning TKA with CT-based PSI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleHumansLower ExtremityMaleMiddle AgedPreoperative CareProspective StudiesProsthesis FittingReproducibility of ResultsSurgeonsSurgery, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedPatient-specific instrumentationPre-operative planningReliabilitySizeTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID29453487
OpenAlexW2788710533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.