Clinical and Economic Case for Patient-Specific Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Study.

INTRODUCTION

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common surgical intervention for severe knee arthritis resulting in joint or cartilage destruction, with success largely depending on prosthetic design and surgical technique. This study compares two Cruciate Retaining (CR) TKA systems, the iTotal® Identity CR system (ConforMIS; Wilmington, MA), a patient-specific knee (PSK) system, with the Triathlon® Total Knee System (Stryker; Kalamazoo, MI), a standard off-the-shelf (OTS) system, hypothesizing that the PSK system results in better clinical outcomes and reduced costs.

METHODS

This single-center, prospective study included 188 patients (217 knees) who underwent TKA with either the PSK or OTS system from August 2017 to February 2021. Participants were enrolled if they had a clinical indication for total knee replacement and were deemed suitable candidates for either system. All participants were adults (18+ years) and capable of providing informed consent. Data on operative times, complications, patient-reported outcomes, and cost metrics were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared to the OTS group, the PSK group had a significantly shorter average total operating room (OR) time (85.2 vs. 95.9 minutes, p < 0.001), tourniquet time (50.2 vs. 64.3 minutes, p < 0.001), OR instrument setup time (5.0 vs. 11.9 minutes, p < 0.001) and OR instrument tear down time (1.5 vs. 7.0 minutes, p < 0.001). At preoperative baseline, the PSK participants had a worse mean Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) score (40.73 vs. 49.6, p <0.001) and worse Knee Society Scores (KSS) (50.9 vs. 62.7, p <0.001) compared to the OTS group. Finally, the PSK group demonstrated greater mean improvement postoperatively in both the KOOS-JR (37.33 vs. 24.61, p <0.001) and the KSS (113.1 vs. 98.1, p <0.001) scores, compared to the OTS group.

CONCLUSIONS

The PSK system demonstrated advantages in operative efficiency and improved patient-reported outcomes at the three-month follow-up compared to a standard OTS knee replacement system. These findings highlight potential benefits in adopting patient-specific implants in TKA, with implications for both clinical outcomes and healthcare cost savings. However, further research with longer follow-up periods in diverse patient populations is necessary to fully understand the long-term implications of patient-specific knee replacement systems.