4 2 S U P P L E M E N T T O O U T P A T I E N T S U R G E R Y M A G A Z I N E A P R I L 2 0 1 6
he says, "but function-
wise the joint doesn't feel
like their own knee."
In an effort to reduce
the unnatural sensation
some patients experience,
more surgeons are using
advanced imaging and 3D
printing to develop cus-
tomized instrumentation
and implants that better
fit an individual patient's anatomy. Here's how the technology can improve your
OR efficiency and joint replacement outcomes.
A cleaner cut
There are 2 main types of patient-specific total knee systems on the market,
says Dr. Buch:
• customized cutting blocks that guide the surgeon while he shapes the
patient's knee to fit the manufacturer's off-the-shelf implant; and
• patient-specific implants designed to mimic the patient's unique knee struc-
ture.
While a surgeon using standard templates and jigs usually relies on anatomic
landmarks to make the cuts in the patient's tibia and femur, patient-specific cut-
ting guides take the guesswork out of the procedure and precisely dictate where
to cut the bone for a better implant fit.
The process typically starts with the patient getting a pre-op CT or MRI scan,
which is then sent to the implant manufacturer, who draws up a preliminary
plan for surgery. The surgeon then logs into a secure system to view the plan
and make adjustments as needed. The manufacturer uses the plan to print a dis-
posable cutting block, which is sent to the facility before the case. "In the OR
• CUSTOMIZED IMPLANTS Using a patient's pre-op CT scans, manufacturers can create
an exact duplicate of the patient's knee for the replacement, instead of relying just on con-
ventional measurements.
Sports
Medicine
South
