Total knees today are performed with the use of standard trials that the surgeon utilises to define appropriate implant rotation, range of motion, and soft tissue balance. This “feel” based approach is very subjective, and lacks a quantifiable approach to interpret our intra-operative knee assessment. Sensor-based trials are embedded into the specific knee designed tibial trial, and wirelessly displays data related to the implant's position and ligament tension. The surgeon can now identify malrotation, soft tissue imbalance, and instability through a full ROM. The surgeon can see dynamic responses to ligament releases, alignment changes, and implant adjustments. As Insall taught us; a TKR is a soft tissue procedure, and a “balanced” knee will demonstrate improved outcomes and greater patient satisfaction.
Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85% to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al. reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al. reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores due so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intra-operatively and post-operatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intra-operative feedback regarding knee quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensored tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide whether to perform a soft tissue balance or minor bone recuts. If soft tissue balancing is chosen, pressure data can indicate where to perform the release and allow the surgeon to assess the pressure changes as titrated soft tissue releases are performed. A multi-center study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes out to three years.
Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacement have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al. reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al. reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores due so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intraoperatively and postoperatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intra-operative feedback regarding knee quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensored tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide whether to perform a soft tissue balance or a minor bone recuts. If soft tissue balancing is chosen, pressure data can indicate where to perform the release and allow the surgeon to assess the pressure changes as titrated soft tissue releases are performed. A multi-center study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes out to three years.
Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores due so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intraoperatively and postoperatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intraoperative feedback regarding knee and component alignment along with quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensored tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide whether to perform a soft tissue balance or minor bone recuts. If soft tissue balancing is performed, the surgeon can assess the pressure changes as titrated soft tissue releases are performed. A multicenter study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes at six months and one year.
Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85% to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores due so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intra-operatively and post-operatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intra-operative feedback regarding knee quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensored tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide whether to perform a soft tissue balance or minor bone recuts. If soft tissue balancing is chosen, pressure data can indicate where to perform the release and allow the surgeon to assess the pressure changes as titrated soft tissue releases are performed. A multi-center study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes at six months and one year.
In a study by Dickstein, one-third of total knee patients were not satisfied even though they were all thought to have had successful results by their orthopaedic surgeons. Noble and Conditt's study showed 14% of patients dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. This occurs despite improvements in instrumentation to obtain proper alignment and implants with excellent kinematics and wear characteristics. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance. Soft tissue imbalance can result in almost a third of early TKR revisions. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intraoperative feedback regarding quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. While visualising a graphical interface, the surgeon can assess the effect of sequential soft tissue releases performed to balance the knee. These smart trials also have imbedded accelerometers used to confirm that one is balancing a properly aligned knee and to provide the option of doing small bony corrections rather than soft tissue releases to obtain balance. A multi-center study using smart trials is demonstrating dramatically better outcomes at six months.
Most orthopaedic surgeons believe that total knee replacement has superb patient outcomes. Long-term results are excellent, with one study showing 15 year survivorship of 97%. However, our objective assessments of our patients' results are greater than patients' subjective assessments. In a study by Dickstein of total knee patients, one-third were not satisfied even though they were all thought to have had successful results by their orthopaedic surgeons. Noble and Conditt's study showed 14% of patients dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. We are puzzled by this patient dissatisfaction since radiographs usually show normal component alignment and positioning. Perhaps some of these patients have subtle soft tissue imbalance and kinematic maltracking. Excellent aligned bone cuts can be expected with modern instrumentation, especially if patient specific cutting instruments or computer navigation are used. However, inadequate instrumentation exists for soft tissue balancing. It is usually based on feel and visual estimation. Soft tissue balancing techniques are difficult to teach and perform by a less experienced surgeon. Smart trials with load bearing and alignment sensors, which can be used with the medial retinaculum closed, will demonstrate the total knee kinematics and quantify soft tissue balance. Graduated soft tissue balancing can be performed while visualising changes in compartment loads. Studies are ongoing with smart trials to establish evidence-based clinical algorithms for soft tissue balancing and document the effects of these techniques on patient satisfaction and long-term outcome.
Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacement have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores due so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intraoperatively and postoperatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intraoperative feedback regarding knee and component alignment along with quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After visualising the resultant data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide whether to perform a soft tissue balance or redo the bone cuts. If soft tissue balancing is performed, the surgeon can assess the pressures effect of sequential soft tissue releases performed to balance the knee. A multi-center study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes at six months and one year.
Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacement has excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al. reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al. reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores do so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intra- and post-operatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intra-operative feedback regarding quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. While visualising a graphical interface, the surgeon can assess the effect of sequential soft tissue releases performed to balance the knee. These smart trials also have embedded accelerometers used to confirm that one is balancing a properly aligned knee and to provide the option of doing small bony corrections rather than soft tissue releases to obtain balance. A multi-center study using smart trials is demonstrating dramatically better outcomes.
Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al. reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al. reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores do so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery. Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intra-operatively and post-operatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly. New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intra-operative feedback regarding knee quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensor tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide if compartment loading differences are greater than 15 pounds whether to perform a soft tissue balance or minor bone recuts. If soft tissue balancing is chosen, pressure data can indicate where to perform the release and allow the surgeon to assess the pressure changes as titrated soft tissue releases are performed. A multi-center study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes out to three years.
Total knee replacement (TKR) smart tibial trials
have load-bearing sensors which will show quantitative compartment
pressure values and femoral-tibial tracking patterns. Without smart
trials, surgeons rely on feel and visual estimation of imbalance
to determine if the knee is optimally balanced. Corrective soft-tissue
releases are performed with minimal feedback as to what and how
much should be released. The smart tibial trials demonstrate graphically
where and how much imbalance is present, so that incremental releases
can be performed. The smart tibial trials now also incorporate accelerometers
which demonstrate the axial alignment. This now allows the surgeon
the option to perform a slight recut of the tibia or femur to provide
soft-tissue balance without performing soft-tissue releases. Using
a smart tibial trial to assist with soft-tissue releases or bone
re-cuts, improved patient outcomes have been demonstrated at one
year in a multicentre study of 135 patients (135 knees). Cite this article:
