To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Custom cutting blocks vs conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
July 2014

Custom cutting blocks vs conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty

Vol: 3| Issue: 7| Number:38| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Randomized Trial
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

The accuracy of component alignment in custom cutting blocks compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty instrumentation: Prospective control trial

Knee. 2014 Jan;21(1):185-8. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2013.08.003. Epub 2013 Aug 15

Contributing Authors:
T Chotanaphuti V Wangwittayakul S Khuangsirikul T Foojareonyos

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Eighty patients scheduled for primary total knee arthroplasty were randomized to instrumentation with custom cutting blocks or to conventional intramedullary and extramedullary instrumentation. Intraoperative data concerning operative time and blood loss were collected, and radiographic outcome was analyzed at 6 weeks postoperatively. The results indicated that mechanical alignment was adequate wi...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue