A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-specific instrumentation for improving alignment of the components in total knee replacement
- E. Thienpont, MD, MBA, Consultant Orthopedic Surgeon1
; - P. E. Schwab, MS, Medical Student1; and
- P. Fennema, DSc, Director2
- Correspondence should be sent to Mr E. Thienpont; e-mail:emmanuel.thienpont@uclouvain.be
Abstract
We conducted a meta-analysis, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies, to examine the effect of patient-specific instruments (PSI) on radiological outcomes after total knee replacement (TKR) including: mechanical axis alignment and malalignment of the femoral and tibial components in the coronal, sagittal and axial planes, at a threshold of > 3º from neutral. Relative risks (RR) for malalignment were determined for all studies and for RCTs and cohort studies separately.
Of 325 studies initially identified, 16 met the eligibility criteria, including eight RCTs and eight cohort studies. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of mechanical axis malalignment with PSI versus conventional TKR across all studies (RR = 0.84, p = 0.304), in the RCTs (RR = 1.14, p = 0.445) or in the cohort studies (RR = 0.70, p = 0.289). The results for the alignment of the tibial component were significantly worse using PSI TKR than conventional TKR in the coronal and sagittal planes (RR = 1.75, p = 0.028; and RR = 1.34, p = 0.019, respectively, on pooled analysis). PSI TKR showed a significant advantage over conventional TKR for alignment of the femoral component in the coronal plane (RR = 0.65, p = 0.028 on pooled analysis), but not in the sagittal plane (RR = 1.12, p = 0.437). Axial alignment of the tibial (p = 0.460) and femoral components (p = 0.127) was not significantly different.
We conclude that PSI does not improve the accuracy of alignment of the components in TKR compared with conventional instrumentation.
Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1052–61.
Footnotes
-
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
This article was primary edited by S. P. H. Hughes and first proof edited by J. Scott.
- Received December 30, 2013.
- Accepted May 6, 2014.
