2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Patient Variation Limits Use of Fixed References for Femoral Rotation Component Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
20
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
3
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A series of patients received long leg pre-operative CT scans for the routine pre-operative planning of TKA surgery [ 24 ] and to design patient-specific instrumentation. Ethics approval for all data collection and accessing information from a joint registry for this study was approved by Bellberry Ethics (Sydney, Australia) (approval 2012-03-710).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A series of patients received long leg pre-operative CT scans for the routine pre-operative planning of TKA surgery [ 24 ] and to design patient-specific instrumentation. Ethics approval for all data collection and accessing information from a joint registry for this study was approved by Bellberry Ethics (Sydney, Australia) (approval 2012-03-710).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, Okamoto et al found that 2D preoperative planning resulted in the internal rotation of the femoral component, and the clinical and surgical angle values measured based on X-ray and CT slices would be smaller than the 3D measurements, causing internal component rotation (12). Numerous studies have been conducted to measure relative TKA parameters from 3D models based on CT and MRI, all of which confirmed the high inter-subject variation of PCA (7,8,13). Gokhan et al indicated that the average PCA was 3.3 ± 1.5 • via 3D constructed models based on CT scans, with 2.8 % of scans identified as outliers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…However, since the sTEA had low intra- and interobserver reproductivity and the anatomic landmarks were difficult to identify during the operation, the PCL + 3° external rotation method was used more often in practice ( 5 ). Jang et al indicated that the PCL + 3° external rotation method was the most accurate compared to the sTEA but highly varied among subjects ( 6 ) since the PCA varies remarkably among patients ( 7 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Individual variations following TKR are then influenced by the combination of implant constraint and design, surgical alignment and positioning, and specific features of a given patient's anatomy (including extraarticular, such as those that might drive variation in hip, spine and ankle biomechanics) [7,8]. These patient-specific anatomical factors include ligament offsets [9] and attachment sites [10], which contribute to ligament laxity and are linked to changes in bone and gap characteristics [11,12] following implant positioning. The interaction between these factors is complex, with individual component position parameters combining with the patient-specific musculoskeletal environment to define the dynamic behaviour of the joint.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%