Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31831022›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2019

Patient-specific instrumentation improved three-dimensional accuracy in total knee arthroplasty: a comparative radiographic analysis of 1257 total knee arthroplasties.

Leo Pauzenberger, Martin Munz, Georg Brandl, Julia K Frank, Philipp R Heuberer, Brenda Laky, Eva Schwameis, Werner Anderl

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. [Clinical application of distal femoral patient-specific cutting guide based on knee CT and full-length X-ray film of lower extremities].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2021
    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

8 authors.

Leo PauzenbergerVienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria.
Martin MunzMedical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Georg BrandlVienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria.
Julia K FrankVienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria.
Philipp R HeubererVienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria.
Brenda LakyVienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria.
Eva SchwameisVienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria.
Werner AnderlVienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria. werner@anderl.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare restoration of mechanical limb alignment and three-dimensional component-positioning between conventional and patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty.

methodsRadiographic data of patients undergoing mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (n = 1257), using either conventional (n = 442) or patient-specific instrumentation (n = 812), were analyzed. To evaluate accuracy of axis restoration and 3D-component-positioning between conventional and patient-specific instrumentation, absolute deviations from the targeted neutral mechanical limb alignment and planned implant positions were determined. Measurements were performed on standardized coronal long-leg and sagittal knee radiographs. CT-scans were evaluated for accuracy of axial femoral implant rotation. Outliers were defined as deviations from the targeted neutral mechanical axis of > ± 3° or from the intraoperative component-positioning goals of > ± 2°. Deviations greater than ± 5° from set targets were considered to be severe outliers.

resultsDeviations from a neutral mechanical axis (conventional instrumentation: 2.3°± 1.7° vs. patient-specific instrumentation: 1.7°± 1.2°; p < 0.001) and numbers of outliers (conventional instrumentation: 25.8% vs. patient-specific instrumentation: 10.1%; p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the patient-specific instrumentation group. Significantly lower mean deviations and less outliers were detected regarding 3D-component-positioning in the patient-specific instrumentation compared to the conventional instrumentation group (all p < 0.05).

conclusionsPatient-specific instrumentation prevented from severe limb malalignment and component-positioning outliers (> ± 5° deviation). Use of patient-specific instrumentation proved to be superior to conventional instrumentation in achieving more accurate limb alignment and 3D-component positioning, particularly regarding femoral component rotation. Furthermore, the use of patient-specific instrumentation successfully prevented severe (> 5° deviation) outliers.

Indexed as

AgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBone MalalignmentFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalKnee JointKnee ProsthesisLegMaleMiddle AgedModels, AnatomicOsteoarthritis, KneePatient PositioningPrecision MedicinePreoperative CareAccuracyOutliersPatient-specific instrumentationThree-dimensional component positionTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID31831022
PMCPMC6909617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.