Fig 1.
Flow-chart of included patients.
Fig 2.
3D planning of the component position which can be adjusted by the surgeon as needed.
Fig 3.
Instrumentation for conventional TKA (a), Patient-specific cutting-guides (b) and reduced Instruments for PSI TKA (c).
Fig 4.
Relative frequencies of divergence to PSI planned sizing of the femoral and the tibial components.
Table 1.
Demographic and surgical data.
Table 2.
Required adjustments when using PSI.
Fig 5.
Alignment of the leg, the femoral and tibial component in the PSI and conventional group.
The box represents 25th to 75th percentiles, negative values correspond to varus deviation, positive values correspond to valgus deviation, LDFA–lateral distal femur angle, MPTA–medial proximal tibia angle.
Table 3.
Patient reported outcomes: Pain VAS, OKS and EQ VAS.