Effect of patient specific instruments compared with conventional instruments in total knee arthroplasty : a randomized controlled trial
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.44924Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Custom guides, Cutting guides, Implants, Knee, Osteoarthrosis, Patient specific instrumentationAbstract
Background and purpose: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to improve implant alignment and clinical outcomes, but its effectiveness remains uncertain. We aimed to compare whether PSI was superior to conventional instrumentation (CVI) in TKA. The primary outcome was the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at 2 years with assessments of additional clinical outcomes up to 5 years after surgery.
Methods: This study included 70 knees with primary osteoarthritis randomized (1:1) to undergo TKA using either PSI or CVI. Outcomes were evaluated using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), radiographic alignment, and radiostereometric analysis (RSA) of migration over the full follow-up period of 5 years.
Results: 68 knees underwent surgery as per protocol. At 2 years, 29 knees in the PSI group and 36 in the CVI group were assessed with the OKS, which improved significantly by 21.2 in the PSI group and 18.2 in the CVI group (mean difference [MD] 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] –1.5 to 5.7). PSI resulted in slightly increased tibial varus alignment (MD –1.4°; CI –2.3° to –0.4°), migrated slightly more into varus (mean difference at 2 years: –0.28 mm, CI –0.54 to –0.03 mm), and showed higher maximum total point motion (MTPM) during the period 1 to 2 years (mean difference: 0.13 mm; CI 0.01–0.25). At 5 years, 3 knees had been revised (PSI: 2; CVI: 1).
Conclusion: PSI did not demonstrate superior outcomes compared with CVI. These findings suggest that PSI may not provide significant benefits over conventional techniques in routine TKA.
Downloads
References
Gunaratne R, Pratt D N, Banda J, Fick D P, Khan R J K, Robertson B W. Patient dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. J Arthroplasty. 2017; 32(12): 3854-60. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.07.021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.07.021
Abdel MP, Ollivier M, Parratte S, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ, Pagnano MW. Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on survival and functional outcomes of modern total knee arthroplasties with cement: a concise follow-up at 20 years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2018; 100(6). Doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01587. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.16.01587
Anderl W, Pauzenberger L, Kolblinger R, Kiesselbach G, Brandl G, Laky B, et al. Patient-specific instrumentation improved mechanical alignment, while early clinical outcome was comparable to conventional instrumentation in TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthros. 2016; 24(1): 102-11. doi: 10.1007/s00167-014-3345-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3345-2
Teeter M G, Marsh J D, Howard J L, Yuan X, Vasarhelyi E M, McCalden R W, et al. A randomized controlled trial investigating the value of patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty in the Canadian healthcare system. Bone Joint J 2019; 101-B(5): 565-72. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B5.BJJ-2018-1323.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.101B5.BJJ-2018-1323.R1
Hampton M J, Blakey C M, Anderson A A, Tomouk W M, Buckley S C, Hamer A J, et al. Minimum 5-year outcomes of a multicenter, prospective, randomized control trial assessing clinical and radiological outcomes of patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2022; 37(8): 1579-85. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.01.039. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2022.01.039
Theeuwen D M J, Dorling I M, Most J, van Drumpt R A M, van der Weegen W, Welting T J M, et al. Patient-specific instrumentation improved clinical outcome and implant survival but is not superior compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty: Ten years follow-up of a multicenter double-blind randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2025; 33(4): 1371-7. doi: 10.1002/ksa.12505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ksa.12505
Rudran B, Magill H, Ponugoti N, Williams A, Ball S. Functional outcomes in patient specific instrumentation vs. conventional instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty; a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2022; 23(1): 702. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05620-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05620-2
Mannan A, Smith T O, Sagar C, London N J, Molitor P J. No demonstrable benefit for coronal alignment outcomes in PSI knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2015; 101(4): 461-8. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2014.12.018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2014.12.018
Ohrn F D, Van Leeuwen J, Tsukanaka M, Rohrl S M. A 2-year RSA study of the Vanguard CR total knee system: a randomized controlled trial comparing patient-specific positioning guides with conventional technique. Acta Orthop 2018; 89(4): 418-24. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1470866. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1470866
Pfitzner T, Abdel M P, von Roth P, Perka C, Hommel H. Small improvements in mechanical axis alignment achieved with MRI versus CT-based patient-specific instruments in TKA: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472(10): 2913-22. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3784-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-3784-6
Mannan A, Smith T O. Favourable rotational alignment outcomes in PSI knee arthroplasty: a Level 1 systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee 2016; 23(2): 186-90. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.08.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2015.08.006
Rivrud S C S, Rohrl S M, Van Leeuwen J. Effects of patient-specific positioning guides (PSPGs) vs. conventional instrumentation on patient-reported outcome in total knee arthroplasty: secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial after 5 years. Acta Orthop 2023; 94:354-9. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2023.15335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2023.15335
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80-B(1). doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.0800063. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.0800063
Ingelsrud L H, Roos E M, Terluin B, Gromov K, Husted H, Troelsen A. Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement. Acta Orthop 2018; 89(5): 541-7. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1480739. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1480739
Clement N D, MacDonald D, Simpson A H. The minimal clinically important difference in the Oxford knee score and Short Form 12 score after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22(8): 1933-9. doi: 10.1007/s00167-013-2776-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2776-5
Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001-1-1; 33(5). doi: 10.3109/07853890109002087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002087
Zahiri C A, Schmalzried T P, Szuszczewicz E S, Amstutz H C. Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13(8): 890-5. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90195-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-5403(98)90195-4
Mahmood F F, Holloway N J, Deakin A H, Clarke J V, Picard F. A new landmark for measuring tibial component rotation after total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2019; 26(3): 779-86. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2018.09.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2018.09.002
Meneghini R M, Mont M A, Backstein D B, Bourne R B, Dennis D A, Scuderi G R. Development of a Modern Knee Society radiographic evaluation system and methodology for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30(12): 2311-14. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.05.049. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.05.049
Keiller T, Saari T, Sharegi B, Kärrholm J. No difference in clinical outcome but in RSA in total knee arthroplasty with the ATTUNE vs. the PFC Sigma: a randomized trial with 2-year follow-up. Acta Orthop 2023; 94: 560-9. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2023.24577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2023.24577
Puijk R, Singh J, Puijk R H, Laende E K, Plevier J W M, Nolte P A, et al. Evaluation and refinement of thresholds for early migration of total knee replacements as an estimator of late aseptic loosening: an updated systematic review of RSA and survival studies. Acta Orthop 2025; 96:1-10. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2024.42574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.42574
Gudnason A, Adalberth G, Nilsson K-G, Hailer N P. Tibial component rotation around the transverse axis measured by radiostereometry predicts aseptic loosening better than maximal total point motion: a follow-up of 116 total knee arthroplasties after at least 15 years. Acta Orthop 2017; 88(3): 282-7 doi: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1297001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2017.1297001
Parratte S, Pagnano M W, Trousdale R T, Berry D J. Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92(12): 2143-9 doi: 10.2106/JBJS.I.01398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.01398
Heath E L, Ackerman I N, Cashman K, Lorimer M, Graves S E, Harris I A. Patient-reported outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasty: results from a large national registry. Bone & Joint Open 2021/06/22; 2(6). doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.26.BJO-2021-0053.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.26.BJO-2021-0053.R1
De Gori M, Adamczewski B, Jenny J Y. Value of the cumulative sum test for the assessment of a learning curve: application to the introduction of patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty in an academic department. Knee 2017; 24(3): 615-21. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2017.03.007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2017.03.007
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jakob Hermodsson, Tuuli Saari, Bita Shareghi, Maziar Mohaddes, Anna Nilsdotter, Johan Kärrholm
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
