Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 43, Issue 5, pp 1113–1121 | Cite as

Clinical and radiological analysis of a personalized total knee arthroplasty system design

  • Francesco Benazzo
  • Matteo GhiaraEmail author
  • Stefano Marco Paolo Rossi
  • Emma Pruneri
  • Vivek Tiwari
  • Simone Perelli
Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

The objectives of this study were to determine the radiological outcome of a new personalized total knee arthroplasty (TKA) design and also to analyze the radiological reproducibility of the surgical technique.

Patients and methods

A total of 100 consecutive TKAs performed in 99 patients using Persona knee system were recruited. Weight-bearing standing anteroposterior and lateral radiographs were done in all the patients, both pre-operatively as well as post-operatively, and various radiological parameters were analyzed and compared.

Results

The full correction of the limb mechanical axis was achieved in 97% of patients, and the radiological parameters of coronal and sagittal alignment of femoral and tibial components showed good results. There were no substantial differences between the mean pre-operative and post-operative patellar height indices, and data were in the normal range. Posterior condylar offset (PCO) and posterior condylar offset ratio (PCOR) had increased as expected after TKA. The coverage of tibia was optimal with data in the normal range.

Conclusions

Radiological assessment of the new personalized knee system design showed excellent results with various parameters restored to the normal values. Therefore, the prosthesis can be considered anatomic, and the surgical technique is reproducible allowing the prosthesis to be implanted easily and with high precision.

Keywords

Total knee arthroplasty Radiological assessment New design 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical Committee approval was obtained for this study.

Conflict of interest

The first author (FB) is part of the design team of the implant. The other authors (MG, SMPR, EP, VT, and SP) declare that they have no conflict of interest. The study is a spontaneous observational investigation carried out by the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Bonnin MP, Basiglini L, Archbold HA (2011) What are the factor of residual pain after uncomplicated TKA? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:1411–1417.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1549-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Day Y, Bischoff JE (2013) Comprehensive assessment of tibial plateau morphology in total knee arthroplasty: influence of shape and size on anthropometric variability. J Orthop Res 31(10):1643–1652.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.22410 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dai Y, Scuderi GR, Bischoff JE, Bertin K, Tarabichi S, Rajgopal A (2014) Anatomic tibial component design can increase tibial coverage and rotational alignment accuracy: a comparison of six contemporary designs Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22: 2911–2923.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3282-0
  4. 4.
    Ghiara M, Combi A, Perticarini L, Rossi SMP, Benazzo F (2013) Patient reported outcome measures in the new persona total knee arthroplasty. J Orthopaed Traumatol 14(Suppl 1):S109–S110Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ghiara M, Combi A, Perticarini L, Rossi SMP, Benazzo F (2013) Short term follow-up in the new Persona total knee arthroplasty. J Orthopaed Traumatol 14(Suppl 1):S111Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benazzo F, Rossi SM (2012) The trivector approach for minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: a technical note. J Orthop Traumatol 13(3):159–162.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-012-0197-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ewald FC (1989) The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:9–12Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sarmah SS, Patel S, Hossain FS, Haddad FS (2012) The radiological assessment of total and unicompartmental knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94-B:1321–1329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ali SA, Helmer R, Terk MR (2009) Patella alta: lack of correlation between patellotrochlear cartilage congruence and commonly used patellar height ratios. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(5):1361–1366.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2729 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yue RA, Arendt EA, Tompkins MA (2017) Patellar height measurements on radiograph and magnetic resonance imaging in patellar instability and control patients. J Knee Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1599249
  11. 11.
    Bellemans J, Banks S, Victor J, Vandenneucker H, Moemans A (2002) Fluoroscopic analysis of the kinematics of deep flexion in total knee arthroplasty: influence of posterior condylar offset. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84-1:50–53Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johal P, Hassaballa MA, Eldridge JD, Porteous AJ (2012) The posterior condylar offset ratio. Knee 19(6):843–845.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2012.03.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stucinskas J, Robertsson O, Sirka A, Lebedev A, Wingstrand H, Tarasevicius S (2015) Moderate varus/valgus malalignment after total knee arthroplasty has little effect on knee or muscle strength. Acta Orthop 86(6):728–733.  https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1059689 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Manjunath KS, Gopalakrishna KG, Vineeth G (2015) Evaluation of alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25(5):895–903.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-015-1638 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Asif S, Choon DSK (2005) Midterm results of cemented Press Fit Condylar Sigma total knee arthroplasty system. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 13(3):280–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bae DK, Song SJ, Yoon KH, Shin SM (2010) The position of the tibial component affecting the postoperative mechanical axis in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 25(7):1131–1136.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2009.10.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Figueroa J, Guarachi JP, Matas J, Arnander M, Orrego M (2016) Is computed tomography an accurate and reliable method for measuring total knee arthroplasty component rotation? Int Orthop 2016 Apr;40(4):709–714. doi:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2917-1
  18. 18.
    Savin L, Botez P, Mihailescu D, Predescu V, Grierosu C (2016) Pre-operative radiological measurement of femoral rotation for prosthetic positioning in total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2016 Sep;40(9):1855–1860. doi:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3110-2
  19. 19.
    Pedraza W, Beckmann J, Mayer C, Mauch F, Huth J, Best R (2016) Partially loaded plain radiographic measurement to evaluate rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 40(12):2519–2526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thienpont E, Zormand D (2016) Higher forgotten joint score for fixed-bearing than for mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(8):2641–2645.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3663-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ollivier M, Parratte S, Lino L, Flecher X, Pesenti S, Argenson JN (2018) No benefit of computer-assisted TKA: 10-year results of a prospective randomized study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 476(1):126–134.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999.0000000000000021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Carlson VR, Post ZD, Orozco FR, Davis DM, Lutz RW, Ong AC (2018) When does the knee feel normal again: a cross-sectional study assessing the forgotten joint score in patients after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 33(3):700–703.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.09.063 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Clinical-Surgical Sciences, Diagnostics and Pediatrics, Operative Unit of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San MatteoUniversity of PaviaPaviaItaly
  2. 2.SICOT Fellow at Department of Clinical-Surgical Sciences, Diagnostics and Pediatrics, Operative Unit of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San MatteoUniversity of PaviaPaviaItaly

Personalised recommendations