Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 10, 2025
The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
Published on: August 4, 2022
Satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective matched-pair analysis of patients with customised
Nicole Vogel1,2,3, Raphael Kaelin4, Thomas Rychen4
1Practice MEIN KNIE, Hirslanden Klinik Birshof, Reinacherstrasse 42, 4142, Münchenstein, Switzerland. nicole.vogel@hirslanden.ch.
Purpose:
Customised individually made (CIM) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was introduced to potentially improve patient satisfaction and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The purpose of this study was to compare PROMs, especially patient satisfaction, of patients with CIM and OTS TKA in a matched-pair analysis with a 2-year follow-up.
Methods:
This is a prospective cohort study with a propensity score matching of 85 CIM and 85 off-the-shelf (OTS) TKA. Follow-up was at 4 months, 1 year and 2 years. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were as follows: overall improvement, willingness to undergo the surgery again, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12), High-Activity Arthroplasty Score (HAAS), EQ-5D-3L, EQ-VAS, Knee Society Score (KSS) and surgeon satisfaction.
Results:
Patient satisfaction ranged from 86 to 90% and did not differ between CIM and OTS TKA. The EQ-VAS after 4 months and the HAAS after 1 year and 2 years were higher for CIM TKA. KOOS, FJS-12 and EQ-5D-3L were not different at follow-up. The changes in KOOS symptoms, pain and daily living were higher for OTS TKA. The KSS was higher for patients with CIM TKA. Surgeon satisfaction was high throughout both groups. Patients who were satisfied after 2 years did not differ preoperatively from those who were not satisfied. Postoperatively, all PROMs were better for satisfied patients. Patient satisfaction was not correlated with patient characteristics, implant or preoperative PROMs, and medium to strongly correlated with postoperative PROMs.
Conclusion:
Patient satisfaction was high with no differences between patients with CIM and OTS TKA. Both implant systems improved function, pain and health-related quality of life. Patients with CIM TKA showed superior results in demanding activities as measured by the HAAS.
Level Of Evidence:
II, prospective cohort study.
