Accuracy of MRI-based vs. CT-based patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The technical objective of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is to restore normal mechanical parameters to the knee. Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) was developed to streamline the operative process and improve accuracy. PSI produces individualized cutting guides based on three-dimensional models of the patient's anatomy acquired from computed-tomography (CT) or magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI). However, the superiority of one modality over the other remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare the accuracy of patient-specific cutting guides produced from MRI or CT imaging methods in TKA. METHODS: Electronic databases were systematically searched using relevant keywords and MeSH terms for original-data English-language publications comparing the accuracy of CT and MRI-based PSI cutting guides in TKA. Data was extracted from the text, tables and figures of studies and meta-analysed. RESULTS: MRI-based PSI cutting guides produced a lower proportion of coronal plane outliers (>3°) with regard to overall limb mechanical axis (OR 2.75, p = 0.01). There were no significant differences between the two in terms of sagittal femoral and tibial component placement, or coronal femoral and tibial placement, or femoral component axial rotation. Tibial rotation was not analysed in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-based patient-specific cutting guides produced a lower proportion of outliers in the overall coronal alignment of the limb compared to CT, with no significant difference between the two in terms of femoral or tibial component placement. Future studies should investigate the differences in resource usage and operative time between the two to inform surgeons' decision making when choosing an ideal imaging modality for PSI TKA. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, systematic review of cohort and comparative studies.

Practical implications of the lumbar spine and its function on total hip arthroplasty.

Correct component placement is of significant importance to ensure optimal outcomes in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Traditionally, the Lewinnek plane has been referenced as an adequate "safe zone", formed between the anterior superior iliac spines and public tubercles to optimize acetabular orientation. However, recent evidence shows that the positioning of this plane may vary due to the biomechanical relationship between the lumbar spine and hip. Therefore, the plane acquired intraoperatively may not accurately recreate the actual functional plane and acetabular orientation encountered outside of the intraoperative environment. This review summarizes the hip-spine relationship and its implications on THA.

Review on squeaking hips.

Squeaking is a well-recognized complication for hard-on-hard bearings. The nature of squeaking is not yet completely understood however it is considered a multifactorial phenomenon. Patient, implant, and surgical factors play a role in squeaking. It is believed that mechanisms damaging the fluid film lubrication in which these bearings function optimally have a critical role. Such mechanisms include edge loading, stripe wear, impingement, third body particles and ceramic fracture. The resonance of metallic parts can produce noise in the human audible range hence the implant metallurgic composition and design may play a role. Implant positioning can facilitate impingement and edge loading enhancing the occurrence of squeaking. The recent introduction of large heads (> 36 mm) 4(th) generation ceramic-on-ceramic bearing may accentuate the conditions facilitating noise formation; however the current literature is insufficient. Clinically, squeaking may manifest in extreme hip positions or during normal gait cycle however it is rarely associated with pain. Evaluations of patients with squeaking include clinical and radiographic assessments. Computer tomography is recommended as it can better reveal ceramic breakage and implant malposition. The treatments for most squeaking patients include reassurance and activity modification. However for some, noise can be a problem, requiring further surgical intervention. In the occurrence of ceramic fracture, implant failure, extreme components malposition, instability and impingement, surgery should be advised. This review will aim to discuss the current literature regarding squeaking.