Automated Landmark Annotation for Morphometric Analysis of Distal Femur and Proximal Tibia.

Manual anatomical landmarking for morphometric knee bone characterization in orthopedics is highly time-consuming and shows high operator variability. Therefore, automation could be a substantial improvement for diagnostics and personalized treatments relying on landmark-based methods. Applications include implant sizing and planning, meniscal allograft sizing, and morphological risk factor assessment. For twenty MRI-based 3D bone and cartilage models, anatomical landmarks were manually applied by three experts, and morphometric measurements for 3D characterization of the distal femur and proximal tibia were calculated from all observations. One expert performed the landmark annotations three times. Intra- and inter-observer variations were assessed for landmark position and measurements. The mean of the three expert annotations served as the ground truth. Next, automated landmark annotation was performed by elastic deformation of a template shape, followed by landmark optimization at extreme positions (highest/lowest/most medial/lateral point). The results of our automated annotation method were compared with ground truth, and percentages of landmarks and measurements adhering to different tolerances were calculated. Reliability was evaluated by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). For the manual annotations, the inter-observer absolute difference was 1.53 ± 1.22 mm (mean ± SD) for the landmark positions and 0.56 ± 0.55 mm (mean ± SD) for the morphometric measurements. Automated versus manual landmark extraction differed by an average of 2.05 mm. The automated measurements demonstrated an absolute difference of 0.78 ± 0.60 mm (mean ± SD) from their manual counterparts. Overall, 92% of the automated landmarks were within 4 mm of the expert mean position, and 95% of all morphometric measurements were within 2 mm of the expert mean measurements. The ICC (manual versus automated) for automated morphometric measurements was between 0.926 and 1. Manual annotations required on average 18 min of operator interaction time, while automated annotations only needed 7 min of operator-independent computing time. Considering the time consumption and variability among observers, there is a clear need for a more efficient, standardized, and operator-independent algorithm. Our automated method demonstrated excellent accuracy and reliability for landmark positioning and morphometric measurements. Above all, this automated method will lead to a faster, scalable, and operator-independent morphometric analysis of the knee.

Orthobiologics in knee osteoarthritis, dream or reality?

Cartilage restoration or repair, also known as orthobiologic therapy, is indicated after the failure of conservative or supportive treatment. However, there is paucity in evidence supporting the efficacy of orthobiologic therapy. The blood-derived products, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), is one of the commonly used orthobiologic therapy for knee osteoarthritis. Several studies have shown that PRP is superior to other treatments, but the anatomic changes are scarce. Treatment with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) offers the greatest potential for curing degenerative disease due to their self-renewal ability, ability to migrate towards injured tissues (homing/trafficking), and ability to promote repair and regeneration of osteochondral defects. However, ethical concerns and high costs remain major challenges associated with MSC therapy. Gene therapy, another promising orthobiologic therapy, is currently in phase II clinical trial and has shown promising results. The key factors for successful orthobiologic therapy include patient selection, appropriate dosing, treatment of underlying mechanical problems, age, severity, and cost-effectiveness.

PCL retained is safe in medial pivot TKA-a prospective randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Medial pivot (MP) designs resemble native knee kinematics and restore the "natural" kinematics of a knee after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, whether to preserve or resect the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) is still under debate. We inquired whether sacrificing the PCL would improve range of motion, functional outcomes, and limb alignment compared to preserving the PCL in TKA using medial pivot implants (MP-TKA). METHODS: This prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial consisted of 33 patients (66 knees) undergoing bilateral simultaneous MP-TKA. In one knee, a PCL preservation technique was performed, and in the contralateral knee, the PCL was resected. The primary outcome was postoperative range of motion (ROM). The secondary outcomes were visual analogue scale (VAS) score for knee pain at walking, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for symptoms (KOOS-S) and quality of life (KOOS-QoL), Oxford knee score (OKS), and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and measurement of the mechanical femoral-tibial axis (mFTA) on X-ray images. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 2 years after surgery. RESULTS: Patients who underwent MP-TKA with PCL preservation had a similar ROM at 2 years (125.45 ± 7.00 vs. 126.21 ± 6.73, p = 0.65) as those who underwent MP-TKAs with PCL resection. There was also no difference in VAS score (1.94 ± 0.79 vs. 2.00 ± 0.71, respectively, p = 0.51), OKS (39.97 ± 2.01 vs. 39.67 ± 2.03, respectively, p = 0.52), KOOS-S (84.41 ± 3.77 vs. 84.19 ± 3.57, respectively, p = 0.92), KOOS-QoL (82.94 ± 4.76 vs. 82.75 ± 4.70, respectively, p = 0.84), or FJS (72.66 ± 8.99 vs. 72.35 ± 8.64, respectively, p = 0.76) at the 2-year follow-up. No difference in the measurement of the mFTA was found between the two groups (180.27 ± 2.25 vs. 181.30 ± 2.13, respectively, p = 0.59). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that both medial pivot TKA with PCL preservation and PCL resection achieved excellent results. There was no difference at the 2-year follow-up in terms of postoperative ROM, patient-reported outcomes, or radiographic evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level I.

The role of genetic polymorphisms of interleukin-1 (IL-1R1 and IL-1RN) in primary knee osteoarthritis in Indonesia.

This study aimed to evaluate the association of SNPs of the IL-1 family with the clinical severity of knee OA. This case‒control study was performed among 100 healthy knees and 130 osteoarthritis (OA) knees of people aged ≥ 50 years with a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2. The possible correlations among clinical findings, radiographic evaluations, serum levels of IL-1R1 and IL-1Ra, and genotype analyses were evaluated. Three SNPs of IL-1R1, rs871659, rs3771202, and rs3917238, were associated with primary knee OA. Females with IL-1R1 SNP rs871659 allele A had a higher prevalence of primary knee OA. No correlation was found between SNPs of IL-1R1 and IL-1RN and clinical or radiologic severity or serum concentrations of IL-1R1 and IL-1Ra (p > 0.05). BMI and IL-1R1 rs3917238 genotype C/C were correlated with moderate-severe VAS scores. A correlation was also found between the EQ-5D-3L self-care dimension and obesity and between the EQ-5D-3L pain and usual activity dimensions and age ≥ 60 and obesity (p < 0.05). Radiologic severity was only associated with age ≥ 60 years (p < 0.05). We found the IL-1R1 SNPs rs871659, rs3771202, and rs3917238 to be predisposing factors for primary knee osteoarthritis. The clinical findings, radiographic severity, and serum concentrations of IL-1R1 and IL-1Ra were not correlated with these gene polymorphisms.

Adductor canal block in outpatient clinic for pain control after knee arthroplasty: A randomized controlled, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Successful total knee replacement surgery is influenced by surgery and rehabilitation program. We hypothesized the adductor canal block (ACB) in the outpatient clinic is safe, effective for pain relief and decreases analgesic consumption compared with controls. METHODS: a paired, randomized controlled trial. The intervention group received ACB with 15 mL mixture of ropivacaine 0.2% with isotonic saline and steroids on post-operative day 14 (POD-14) at the outpatient clinic, the control group received daily consumption of analgesic. We evaluated Visual Analog Score (VAS) pain score, and analgesic consumption. RESULTS: 35 subjects for each group. In the ACB group, mean of age was 66.42 years old, mean of BMI was 25.87. The control group, mean of age was 64.11 years old, mean of BMI was 25.95. There were significantly different mean VAS scores of both groups and analgesic consumption of both groups on POD 15th, 17th and 19th (p = 0.00, 0.000 and 0.001, respectively). Two patients complained about hematoma in their thigh (insertion needle) and recovered. CONCLUSIONS: Single-shot ACB in the outpatient clinic is safe, significantly decreased pain and analgesic consumption and may enhance the rehabilitation program.

Interleukin-1 genetic polymorphisms in knee osteoarthritis: What do we know? A meta-analysis and systematic review.

PURPOSE: Interleukin-1 is the main proinflammatory cytokine in osteoarthritis (OA). Several single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within the IL-1 gene cluster (IL-1ß, IL-1R1, and IL-1RN) have been determined, but their associations with knee OA remain poorly understood. The present study aimed to identify the associations between IL-1 SNPs and knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: This meta-analysis and systematic review included all comparative studies published in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases. We performed a systematic search to identify relevant studies on the evaluation of the correlation between the IL-1 gene and knee OA published up to February 2020 that met the eligibility criteria. Nine studies on a total of 2256 knees with OA and 3527 healthy knees met the eligibility criteria. Results associated with IL-1A, IL-1B, IL-1R1, and IL-1RN SNPs were extracted and compared between knees with OA and healthy knees. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). All studies with fair or good quality were included. RESULTS: The meta-analysis showed that the risk of knee OA is decreased by the IL-1RN*1 and IL-1RN*1/*1 genotypes and increased by the IL-1RN*2 and I-L1RN*1/*2 genotypes. The systematic review revealed only two studies associating the IL-1RN allele, none associating the IL-1B polymorphism, and only one study associating IL-1A and IL-1R1 polymorphisms with knee OA. CONCLUSIONS: Several IL-1RN alleles and genotypes play a role in knee OA but other genetic variations in the IL-1 region were still conflicting in its association with knee OA.

Mismatched knee implants in Indonesian and Dutch patients: a need for increasing the size.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the anthropometric differences between knees of Indonesian Asians and Dutch Caucasians and the fit of nine different knee implant systems. METHODS: A total of 268 anteroposterior (AP) and lateral knee preoperative radiographs from 134 consecutive patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty at two different centres in Jakarta and Leiden were included. Both patient groups were matched according to age and sex and included 67 Asians and 67 Caucasians. We assessed the radiographic differences between the Asian and Caucasian anthropometric data. The dimensions of the nine knee implant designs (Vanguard, Genesis II, Persona Standard, Persona Narrow, GK Sphere, Gemini, Attune Standard, Attune Narrow, and Sigma PFC) were compared with the patients' anthropometric (distal femur and proximal tibia) measurements. RESULTS: The Dutch Caucasian patients had larger mediolateral (ML) and AP femoral and tibial dimensions than the Indonesian Asians. The aspect ratios of the distal femur and tibia were larger in Asians than in Caucasians. The AP and ML dimensions were mismatched between the tibial components of the nine knee systems and the Asian anthropometric data. Both groups had larger ML distal femoral dimensions than the knee systems. CONCLUSION: Absolute and relative differences in knee dimensions exist not only between Asian and Caucasian knees but also within both groups. Not all TKA systems had a good fit with the Asian and Caucasian knee phenotypes. An increase in the range of available knee component sizes would be beneficial, although TKA remains an adequate compromise. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Does Circumferential Patellar Denervation Result in Decreased Knee Pain and Improved Patient-reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Nonresurfaced, Simultaneous Bilateral TKA?

BACKGROUND: Anterior knee pain, which has a prevalence of 4% to 49% after TKA, may be a cause of patient dissatisfaction after TKA. To limit the occurrence of anterior knee pain, patellar denervation with electrocautery has been proposed. However, studies have disagreed as to the efficacy of this procedure.Questions/purposes We evaluated patients undergoing bilateral, simultaneous TKA procedures without patellar resurfacing to ask: (1) Does circumferential patellar cauterization decrease anterior knee pain (Kujala score) postoperatively compared with non-cauterization of the patella? (2) Does circumferential patellar cauterization result in better functional outcomes based on patient report (VAS score, Oxford knee score, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) than non-cauterization of the patella? (3) Is there any difference in the complication rate (infection, patellar maltracking, fracture, venous thromboembolism, or reoperation rate) between cauterized patellae and non-cauterized patellae? METHODS: Seventy-eight patients (156 knees) were included in this prospective, quasi-randomized study, with each patient serving as his or her own control. Patellar cauterization was always performed on the right knee during simultaneous, bilateral TKA. Five patients (6%) were lost to follow-up before the 2-year minimum follow-up interval. A single surgeon performed all TKAs using the same type of implant, and osteophyte excision was performed in all patellae, which were left unresurfaced. Patellar cauterization was performed at 2 mm to 3 mm deep and approximately 5 mm circumferentially away from the patellar rim. The preoperative femorotibial angle and degree of osteoarthritis (according to the Kellgren-Lawrence grading system) were measured. Restoration of the patellofemoral joint was assessed using the anterior condylar ratio. Clinical outcomes, consisting of clinician-reported outcomes (ROM and Kujala score) and patient-reported outcomes (VAS pain score, Oxford knee score, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score), were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 month and 2 years postoperatively. Preoperatively, the radiologic severity of osteoarthritis, based on the Kellgren-Lawrence classification, was not different between the two groups, nor were the baseline pain and knee scores. The mean femorotibial angle of the two groups was also comparable: 189° ± 4.9° and 191° ± 6.3° preoperatively (p = 0.051) and 177° ± 2.9° and 178° ± 2.1° postoperatively (p = 0.751) for cauterized and non-cauterized knees, respectively. The preoperative (0.3 ± 0.06 versus 0.3 ± 0.07; p = 0.744) and postoperative (0.3 ± 0.06 versus 0.2 ± 0.07; p = 0.192) anterior condylar ratios were also not different between the cauterized and non-cauterized groups. RESULTS: At the 2-year follow-up interval, no difference was observed in the mean Kujala score (82 ± 2.9 and 83 ± 2.6 for cauterized and non-cauterized knees, respectively; mean difference 0.3; 95% confidence interval, -0.599 to 1.202; p = 0.509). The mean VAS pain score was 3 ± 0.9 in the cauterized knee and 3 ± 0.7 in the non-cauterized knee (p = 0.920). The mean ROM was 123° ± 10.8° in the cauterized knee and 123° ± 10.2° in the non-cauterized knee (p = 0.783). There was no difference between cauterized and non-cauterized patellae in the mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for symptoms (86 ± 4.5 versus 86 ± 3.9; p = 0.884), pain (86 ± 3.8 versus 86 ± 3.6; p = 0.905), activities (83 ± 3.2 versus 83 ± 2.8; p = 0.967), sports (42 ± 11.3 versus 43 ± 11.4; p = 0.942), and quality of life (83 ± 4.9 versus 83 ± 4.7; p = 0.916), as well as in the Oxford knee score (40 ± 2.1 versus 41 ± 1.9; p = 0.771). Complications were uncommon and there were no differences between the groups (one deep venous thromboembolism in the cauterized group and two in the control group; odds ratio 0.49, 95% CI, 0.04-5.56; p = 0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Patellar cauterization results in no difference in anterior knee pain, functional outcomes, and complication rates compared with non-cauterization of the patella in patients who undergo non-resurfaced, simultaneous, bilateral, primary TKA with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. We do not recommend circumferential patellar cauterization in non-resurfaced patellae in patients who undergo TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Peroneus longus autograft can be recommended as a superior graft to hamstring tendon in single-bundle ACL reconstruction.

PURPOSE: A peroneus longus tendon autograft is used in many orthopaedic procedures and it is biomechanically comparable to a hamstring tendon autograft. Despite its potential, there are few studies that have evaluated the use of the peroneus longus tendon in ACL reconstruction. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome and donor site morbidity of ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts versus peroneus longus tendon autografts in patients with an isolated ACL injury. METHODS: Patients who underwent isolated single-bundle ACL reconstruction were allocated to two groups (hamstring and peroneus longus) and observed prospectively. Graft diameter was measured intraoperatively. Functional scores (IKDC, modified Cincinnati and Lysholm scores) were recorded preoperatively and 1 year after surgery. Donor site morbidities were assessed with thigh circumference measurements and ankle scoring with the AOFAS and FADI. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients (hamstring n = 28, peroneus n = 24) met the inclusion criteria. The peroneus longus graft diameter (8.8 ± 0.7 mm) was significantly larger than the hamstring diameter (8.2 ± 0.8 mm) (p = 0.012). There were no significant differences between the pre- and 1-year postoperative score between the hamstring and peroneus longus groups in the IKDC (n.s), modified Cincinnati (n.s), and Lysholm (n.s). The mean for the AOFAS was 97.3 ± 4.2 and for the FADI 98 ± 3.4 in the peroneus longus group, with a significant decrease in thigh circumference in the hamstring group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with peroneus longus autografts produces a functional score (IKDC, modified Cincinnati, Lysholm) comparable to that of hamstring autografts at a 1-year follow-up, with the advantages of larger graft diameter, less thigh hypotrophy and excellent ankle function based on AOFAS and FADI scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective cohort study, Level II.

Does Accelerometer-based Navigation Have Any Clinical Benefit Compared with Conventional TKA? A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Accelerometer-based navigation is a handheld navigation tool that was introduced to offer a simpler technique compared with more-cumbersome computer-assisted surgery (CAS). Considering the increasing number of adopters, it seems important to evaluate the potential clinical benefits of this technology compared with conventional TKA. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this systematic review, we asked: (1) Is accelerometer-based navigation more accurate than conventional TKA? (2) Does accelerometer-based navigation provide better functional outcome than conventional TKA? (3) Does accelerometer-based navigation increase surgical time or decrease the risk of complications or reoperations compared with conventional TKA? METHODS: This systematic review included all comparative prospective and retrospective studies published in the MEDLINE/PubMed and Cochrane libraries over the last 10 years. Inclusion criteria were all studies in English that compared accelerometer-based navigation with conventional TKA. Eleven studies met these criteria with 621 knees in accelerometer-based navigation group and 677 knees in conventional TKA group. Results related to alignment, objective and subjective functional scores, duration of surgery, complications and reoperations were extracted and compared between accelerometer-based-navigation and conventional TKA. Methodological quality was assessed using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool (for nonrandomized control trials) and Cochrane Risk of Bias (for randomized control trials (RCTs). All studies with fair or better quality were included. Four RCTs and six nonrandomized studies comparing accelerometer-based navigation to conventional TKA were found. RESULTS: Inconsistent evidence on mechanical axis alignment was found, with five of nine studies slightly favoring the accelerometer-based navigation group, and the other four showing no differences between the groups. Only two of eight studies favored accelerometer-based navigation in terms of tibial component alignment in the coronal plane; the other six found no between-group differences. Similarly, mixed results were found regarding other metrics related to component alignment; a minority of studies favored accelerometer-based navigation by a small margin, and most studies found no between-group differences. Only three studies evaluated functional outcome and none of them showed a difference in range of motion or patient-reported outcomes. Most studies, six of seven, found no between-group differences concerning surgical time; one study demonstrated a slight increase in time with accelerometer-based navigation. There were no between-group differences in terms of the risk of complications, which generally were uncommon in both groups, and no reoperations or revisions were reported in either group. CONCLUSIONS: We found conflicting evidence about whether accelerometer-based navigation reduces the number of coronal-plane outliers or improves alignment to a clinically important degree, and we found no evidence that it improves patient-reported outcomes or reduces the risk of complications or reoperations. Accelerometer-based navigation may increase surgical time. The overall quality of the evidence was low, which suggested that any observed benefits were overestimated. Given the absence of higher-quality evidence demonstrating compelling benefits of this accelerometer-based navigation technology, it should not be widely adopted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.