Objective To compare the differences of clinical efficacy between 3D printing technology surgical method and conventional surgical method in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and to investigate the application of 3D printing osteotomy technique assisted TKA in the treatment of knee arthropathy. Methods From October 2015 to June 2018, 136 knees of 120 patients with TKA were randomly divided into two groups, a 3D group and a conventional group. The 60 patients in the 3D group (70 knees) used 3D printing osteotomy guide plate to assist the TKA operation. The 60 patients (66 knees) in the conventional group adopted the traditional TKA method over the same period. There were no significant differences in age, gender and knee society score grade among two groups before operation (P>0.05). Operation time, the actual distal femur and the osteotomy data of proximal tibia during operation were recorded. The mechanical femur tibia angle (MFTA), the sagittal tibia plateau caster angle (STCA) of two groups after operation were measured by X-ray and were analyzed statistically, and the knee society score (KSS) was recorded and compared between the two groups at the end of the follow-ups. Results All patients were followed up for 9~32 months, no infection, prosthesis loosening or motion was observed in two groups. No significant differences in the distal femur and the osteotomy data of proximal tibia were found between the planned value in 3D group and the actual value in the operation (P＞0.05). There were statistical significances in operation time, MFTA value and STCA value between 3D group and conventional group (P<0.05). The 3D group had better clinical and functional grade in KSS than the conventional group during the last follow-ups. and there were statistical significances (P＜0.05). Conclusion The 3D printing technique can simplify the operation procedure, improve the surgical accuracy and the clinical efficacy, making it worthy of further promotion.
Key words
Knee-joint /
Arthroplasty /
3D printing /
Osteotomy /
Personalized
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] Victor J, Dujardin J, Vandenneucker H, et al. Patient-specificguides do not improve accuracy in total knee arthroplasty: aprospective randomized controlled trial[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2014, 472(1): 263-271.
[2] Malhotra R, Singla A, Lekha C, et al. A prospective randomizedstudy to compare systemic emboli using the computer-assisted andconventional techniques of total knee arthroplasty[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2015, 97(11): 889-894.
[3] Iorio R, Bolle G, Conteduca F, et al. Accuracy of manualinstrume ntation of tibial cutting guide in total knee arthroplasty[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2013, 21(10): 2296-2300.
[4] Krishnan SP, Dawood A, Richards R, et al. Areview of rapid prototyped surgical guides for patient-specific total knee replacement[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2012, 94(11): 1457-1461.
[5] Cozmei C, Caloian F. Additive manufacturing flickering at thebeginning of existence[J]. Procedia Economics and Finance, 2012, 3(12): 457-462.
[6] Nunley RM, Ellison BS, Ruh EL, et al. Are patient-specific cuttingblocks cost-effective for total knee arthroplasty[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2012, 470(3): 889-894.
[7] Lachiewicz PF, Henderson RA. Patient-specific instruments fortotal knee arthroplasty[J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2013, 21(9): 513-518.
[8] 吴东迎, 袁峰, 吴继彬, 等. 3D打印截骨导板在人工全系关节置换术中的应用[J]. 中华骨科杂志, 2015, 35(9): 921-926.
[9] 刘峰, 张勇, 朱庭标, 等. 3D打印截骨导板辅助TKA治疗膝外翻畸形[J]. 中国骨与关节损伤杂志, 2017, 32(3): 329-331.
[10]Cip J, Widemschek M, Luegmair M, et al. Conventional versus computer-assisted technique for total knee arthroolasty: a minimum of 5-year follow-up of 200 patients in a prospective randomized comparative trial[J] . J Arthroplasty, 2014, 29(9): 1795-1802.
[11]Harvie P, Sloan K , Beaver RJ. Computer navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty five-year functional results of a prospective randomized trial[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2012, 27(5): 667-672.
[12]Gøothesen O, Espehaug B, Havelin LI, et al. Functional outcome and alignment in computer-assisted and conventionally operated total knee replacements: a multicentre parallel-group randomised controlled trial[J]. Bone Jiont J, 2014, 96-B(5): 609-618.
[13]Song EK, Seon JK, Yim JH, et al. Robotic-assisted TKA reduces postoperative alignment outliers and improves gap balance compared to conventional TKA[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2013, 471(1): 118-126.
[14]Bell SW, Anthony I, Jones B, et al. Improved accuracy of component positioning with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: data from a prospective, randomized controlled study[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2016, 98(8): 627-635.
[15]Pearle AD, O'Loughlin PF, Kendoff DO. Robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2010, 25(2): 230-237.
