Efficiency Assessment of Intelligent Patient-specific Instrumentation in Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview

Journal J Orthop Surg Res

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2024 Sep 28

PMID 39342311

Authors

Guoqing Liao

Jinmei Duoji

Lishuai Mu

Yiling Zhang

Xingyu Liu

Daozhang Cai

Chang Zhao

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the practical use of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been reported previously with both advantage and disadvantage. The application of artificial intelligent (AI) forces overwhelmingly development of medical industries, while the impact of AI on PSI efficiency remains unknown. Thus, this study aimed to assess the efficiency of Intelligent-PSI (i-PSI) in TKA, compared with the conventional instrumentation-TKA (CI).

Methods: 102 late-stage OA patients who met inclusive criteria were recruited in this prospective randomized controlled trial and separated into two groups (i-PSI vs. CI). In both groups, an AI preoperative planning engine was applied for surgery decision making. In CI group, conventional instrumentation was applied for bony resection, while resection of i-PSI group was completed with i-PSI. A convolutional neural network was applied to automatically process computer tomography images and thus produced i-PSI. With the help of three-dimension printing, the workflow of production was largely simplified. AI-driven preoperative planning guided resection and alignment decisions. Resection measurement, perioperative radiography and perioperative clinical outcomes were analyzed to verify efficiency of i-PSI.

Results: In resection outcomes, smaller deviation of lateral and medial distal femoral resection were found in i-PSI group than CI group (P = 0.032 and 0.035), while no difference was found in other resection planes. In radiography outcomes, postoperative coronal alignments of i-PSI group, including postoperative Hip-knee-ankle axis (HKA) (P = 0.025), postoperative HKA outliners (P = 0.042), Femoral coronal alignment (FCA) (P = 0.019) and Joint line convergence angle (JLCA) (P = 0.043) showed closer to neutral position than CI group. Moreover, Femoral sagittal alignment (FSA) of i-PSI group showed closer to neutral position than CI group(P = 0.005). No difference was found in other alignments. In clinical outcomes, i-PSI group seemed to cost more surgical time than CI group (P = 0.027), while others showed no differences between the two groups.

Conclusion: Intelligent Patient-specific Instrumentation in TKA achieved simplified production flow than conventional PSI, while also showed more accurate resection, improved synthesis position and limb alignment than conventional instrumentation. Above all, this study proved that i-PSI being an applicable and promising tool in TKA.

References

Gromov K, Korchi M, Thomsen M, Husted H, Troelsen A . What is the optimal alignment of the tibial and femoral components in knee arthroplasty?. Acta Orthop. 2014; 85(5):480-7. PMC: 4164865. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2014.940573. View

Gross J . Estimating allowable blood loss: corrected for dilution. Anesthesiology. 1983; 58(3):277-80. DOI: 10.1097/00000542-198303000-00016. View

Chun Y, Kim K, Cho Y, Kim Y, Yoo M, Rhyu K . Causes and patterns of aborting a robot-assisted arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010; 26(4):621-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.05.017. View

Lei K, Liu L, Chen X, Feng Q, Yang L, Guo L . Navigation and robotics improved alignment compared with PSI and conventional instrument, while clinical outcomes were similar in TKA: a network meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021; 30(2):721-733. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-021-06436-8. View

Lee B, Cho H, Bin S, Kim J, Jo B . Femoral Component Varus Malposition is Associated with Tibial Aseptic Loosening After TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018; 476(2):400-407. PMC: 6259714. DOI: 10.1007/s11999.0000000000000012. View

Sodhi N, Khlopas A, Piuzzi N, Sultan A, Marchand R, Malkani A . The Learning Curve Associated with Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2017; 31(1):17-21. DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1608809. View

Price A, Alvand A, Troelsen A, Katz J, Hooper G, Gray A . Knee replacement. Lancet. 2018; 392(10158):1672-1682. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32344-4. View

Kwon O, Kang K, Son J, Suh D, Heo D, Koh Y . Patient-specific instrumentation development in TKA: 1st and 2nd generation designs in comparison with conventional instrumentation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016; 137(1):111-118. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-016-2618-2. View

Gyftopoulos S, Lin D, Knoll F, Doshi A, Cantarelli Rodrigues T, Recht M . Artificial Intelligence in Musculoskeletal Imaging: Current Status and Future Directions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019; 213(3):506-513. PMC: 6706287. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.19.21117. View

10.

Yuan L, Yang B, Wang X, Sun B, Zhang K, Yan Y . The Bony Resection Accuracy with Patient-Specific Instruments during Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Case Series Study. Biomed Res Int. 2021; 2021:8674847. PMC: 7902140. DOI: 10.1155/2021/8674847. View

11.

Li S, Liu S, Wang X . Advances of 3D Printing in Vascularized Organ Construction. Int J Bioprint. 2022; 8(3):588. PMC: 9469199. DOI: 10.18063/ijb.v8i3.588. View

12.

Levy Y, An V, Shean C, Groen F, Walker P, Bruce W . The accuracy of bony resection from patient-specific guides during total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 25(6):1678-1685. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-016-4254-3. View

13.

Abane L, Zaoui A, Anract P, Lefevre N, Herman S, Hamadouche M . Can a Single-Use and Patient-Specific Instrumentation Be Reliably Used in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Multicenter Controlled Study. J Arthroplasty. 2018; 33(7):2111-2118. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.038. View

14.

Roh Y, Kim T, Lee S, Seong S, Lee M . Is TKA using patient-specific instruments comparable to conventional TKA? A randomized controlled study of one system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471(12):3988-95. PMC: 3825894. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3206-1. View

15.

Vaidya N, Deshpande A, Panjwani T, Patil R, Jaysingani T, Patil P . Robotic-assisted TKA leads to a better prosthesis alignment and a better joint line restoration as compared to conventional TKA: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020; 30(2):621-626. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-020-06353-2. View

16.

Anderl W, Pauzenberger L, Kolblinger R, Kiesselbach G, Brandl G, Laky B . Patient-specific instrumentation improved mechanical alignment, while early clinical outcome was comparable to conventional instrumentation in TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014; 24(1):102-11. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3345-2. View

17.

Kosse N, Heesterbeek P, Schimmel J, van Hellemondt G, Wymenga A, Defoort K . Stability and alignment do not improve by using patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017; 26(6):1792-1799. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-017-4792-3. View

18.

Gong S, Xu W, Wang R, Wang Z, Wang B, Han L . Patient-specific instrumentation improved axial alignment of the femoral component, operative time and perioperative blood loss after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018; 27(4):1083-1095. PMC: 6435625. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-018-5256-0. View

19.

Stolarczyk A, Nagraba L, Mitek T, Stolarczyk M, Deszczynski J, Jakucinski M . Does Patient-Specific Instrumentation Improve Femoral and Tibial Component Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Prospective Randomized Study. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018; 1096:11-17. DOI: 10.1007/5584_2018_193. View

20.

Loftus T, Tighe P, Filiberto A, Efron P, Brakenridge S, Mohr A . Artificial Intelligence and Surgical Decision-making. JAMA Surg. 2019; 155(2):148-158. PMC: 7286802. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4917. View