ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Three-dimensional verification of osteotomy accuracy in total knee arthroplasty using intraoperative CT imaging: a case series study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundPrecise execution of preoperative 3D planning is critical in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but current verification methods—postoperative imaging, navigation, robotics—have limitations: they often assess alignment indirectly or fail to directly compare planned and actual osteotomy surfaces. An in vivo method to quantitatively evaluate plan-execution discrepancies on resected surfaces is lacking. This study aimed to introduce a novel technique for acquiring the TKA osteotomy surface using intraoperative CT, and subsequently comparing it with the preoperative plan to accurately evaluate the precision of osteotomy. Furthermore, this technique was utilized to assess the reliability of osteotomy accuracy in patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) assisted TKA procedures.
methodsIn this case series study, intraoperative CT scans were acquired immediately after bone resection in 80 TKAs. 3D models of the resected surfaces were created and precisely superimposed onto the preoperative 3D planning models. Angular discrepancies between planned and achieved osteotomy planes (coronal, sagittal, axial) for femur and tibia were quantified. Outliers (> 3°) were assessed.
resultsExcellent inter- and intra-observer reliability was confirmed, with Intra-class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) ranging from 0.807 to 0.959. Intraoperative CT verification demonstrated femoral deviations of 0.91° ± 0.71° (coronal plane, 2.5% outliers), 2.07° ± 1.98° (sagittal plane, 24.1%), and 1.45° ± 1.28° (axial plane, 19.0%). Tibial deviations were measured at 1.39° ± 0.93° (coronal plane, 5.2%), 2.49° ± 2.21° (sagittal plane, 31.2%), and 4.25° ± 3.82° (axial plane, 7.8%).
conclusionThis study represented the first application of intraoperative CT for in vivo verification of osteotomy accuracy in TKA. Results demonstrated excellent consistency. The results for PSI-assisted TKA, validated by this innovative method, showed excellent performance in the coronal plane, with minimal angular deviations and low outlier rates. However, there were still deficiencies in the sagittal and axial planes. This novel verification method not only served as an effective tool for surgical evaluation, but also functioned as a powerful postoperative review and analysis instrumentation, providing critical insights for optimizing and enhancing related surgical techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, a case series study.
trial registrationThis trial was registered at Chinese clinical trial registry, registration number: ChiCTR2000039217, registration date: 22/10/2020).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.