In today's era of orthopaedics, PSI helps in performing the replacement surgery more accurately with reproducible results. The literature supports the usage of PSI with numerous benefits.
Market has numerous options of PSI - few being MRI based, while others CT based. What is your take on this technology and which one do you prefer, if any?
There are two main goals from the imaging. The first is to calculate the optimal alignment for the replacement and the second is to produce cutting blocks which are accurate and easy to use intra-operatively. CT is better for quick analysis of bone contours and therefore alignment whilst MRI can give images which facilitate the production of better jigs - as they can incorporate cartilage and soft tissue. You could argue that as both are non weight-bearing, neither can actually measure physiological alignment. S&N Visionaire is likely one of the most popular and uses combined MRI and full leg X-Ray to design cutting blocks specific to that patient.
CT based is is quicker (for the patient) and cheaper. you also don’t have to worry about the patient being claustrophobic.
Newer technologies are now using 2D X-rays and converting them into 3-D images like Zimmer-Biomet does for its Rosa robot. eventually they will do that for custom cutting blocks as well.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Filing