Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 1 of 1
Results per page:
Applied filters
Knee

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_13 | Pages 4 - 4
7 Aug 2023
Khaleeq T Saeed AZ Ahmed U Ajula R Boutefnouchet T D'Alessandro P Malik S
Full Access

Abstract

Customised individually made implants(CIM) total knee arthroplasty(TKA) are custom-made to better fit patients native anatomy and aim to improve outcomes which can be variable with conventional off-the-shelf(OTS).

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted searching the MEDLINE and Embase databases. Studies reporting on patient reported outcome measures, clinical or radiological outcomes were included.

23 studies satisfied the search criteria (case-control studies14, case series8, cross-sectional studies1). There were 2,856(CIM) and 1,877(OTS) implants. The overall revision-rate was higher in CIM 5.9%vs3.7%OTS [OR 1.46(95% CI 0.82–2.62)]. MUA was higher in the CIM group 2.2%vs.1.1%OTS [OR 2.95(95% CI 0.95–9.13)] and overall complications rate was also higher in the CIM group 5% vs. 4.5%OTS [OR 1.45(95% CI 0.53–3.96)]. LOS was significantly shorter in the CIM group 2.9 days vs. 3.5 days [MD −0.51(95% CI −0.82–0.20)]. Pooled analysis for KSS showed no difference between CIM and OTS groups(Knee=90.5 vs. 90.6 [MD-0.27,(95% CI −4.27–3.73)] and Function=86.1 vs. 90.6[MD 1.51 (95% CI −3.69–6.70)] component of the scores. There was no significant difference in post-operative ROM between CIM and OTS groups 117.3° vs. 115.0° [MD 0.02,(95% CI −1.70–1.74)].

CIM TKAs has theoretical benefits over OTS TKAs however in this review they were associated with higher complication, MUA and revision rates with no difference in outcome scores and no improvement in target alignment. The findings of this review does not support the use of CIM over OTS prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty.