The invention relates to jigs for guiding bone resectioning in knee replacement surgery, and to the manufacture of such jigs, such that each jig is patient-specific with custom specifications determined from MRI slices of a patient's tibio-femoral joint region.
Femoral and tibial surgical cutting jigs are used to guide bone resectioning in knee replacement surgery. Each jig contains both the various bone-jig contact surfaces and a cutting guide defining a cut plane. In order that the cut planes are correct when the respective jigs are installed during surgery, each jig must be custom manufactured to correspond to a patient's own femur and tibia. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of a patient's tibio-femoral joint region is performed prior to surgery to define the parameters needed to manufacture patient-specific jigs.
One problem in parameterizing the surface features from the MRI scans is that the coronal, axial and sagittal view orientations of actual scans do not necessarily (and usually do not) coincide with desired orthogonal axes for creating the jig, necessitating one or more rotational transformations of the respective scan slices with simultaneous rotation of all these views (coronal, axial and sagittal). Unfortunately, a “simple” Euler transformation is insufficient to obtain the proper simultaneous rotations of the image slices because it incorrectly assumes that the planes for the coronal, axial and sagittal slices being rotated are themselves orthogonal to each other. Consequently, performing a rotation θ of a coronal slice in an x-z plane alters the axial and sagittal view coordinates as well; and likewise, for a rotation φ of an axial slice in an x-y plane, and rotation ψ of a sagittal slice in a y-z plane. With an Euler transformation, as many as 15 individual iterations of the transformation may be required before the slices in the different view planes converge to fixed values, and even then, may still be wrong.
Patient-specific, femoral and tibial surgical cutting jigs for bone resection are provided that are mechanical self-locking with respect to features in the tibio-femoral joint region. Each jig is a single unitary piece combining a set of bone-jig contact surfaces and bone cutting guide defining a cut plane. The set of contact surfaces are curvilinear surfaces formed onto ends of planar fins projecting from a jig substrate. The curvilinear surfaces are positioned to abut respective lateral and medial articular surface features in the tibio-femoral joint region such that the unitary piece has one and only one mechanical self-locking position.
Bone-jig contact specifications (including any cartilage on the bone as also a part of the bone surface) are computed from a series of coronal, axial and sagittal image slices obtained by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of a patient's tibio-femoral joint region. MRI image slices that show specified lateral and medial articular surface features in the tibio-femoral joint region are selected. Rotational transformations of the selected coronal, axial and sagittal MRI image slices onto orthogonal jig coordinates are iteratively performed, wherein each iteration of a transformation in some specified plane of rotation is accompanied by a projection of rotated coordinates onto that plane of rotation. From these transformed image slices, patient-specific parameters are characterized for specified lateral and medial articular surface features in the tibio-femoral joint region to thereby specify a set of bone-jig contact surfaces and a cut plane. Thus, the curvilinear surfaces of each jig are characterized by custom patient-specific parameters derived from measurements from selected coronal, axial and sagittal MRI slices of the tibio-femoral joint that have been subject to iterated rotational transformations onto orthogonal jig coordinates.
Accordingly, femoral and tibial surgical jigs are manufactured having curvilinear surfaces positioned according to the transformed image slices. Each jig is in the form of a single unitary piece combining a bone cutting guide and a set of curvilinear surfaces formed onto ends of projections from a jig substrate. The curvilinear surfaces abut respective lateral and medial articular surface features in the tibio-femoral joint region of the patient such that the jig has one and only one mechanical self-locking position and the bone cutting guide defines the specified cut plane.
The invention relates to jigs for guiding bone resectioning in knee replacement surgery. Each jig, one for the femur and another for the tibia, contains both the various bone-jig contact surfaces and the cutting guide as a single unitary piece. For purposes of defining jig parameters, note we shall consider and treat any cartilage on the relevant bone as also constituting a part of the bone surface that the jig will contact. Hence, any reference to bone-jig contact surfaces will also include any cartilage-jig contact surfaces. The contact surfaces are curvilinear surfaces formed into ends of planar fins that project from the jig base or substrate. Each jig has three (3) pairs of contact surfaces selected to abut low-wear, lateral and medial, articular surface features, such that the jig has one and only one possible self-locking position against the bone and so the jig's integral cutting guide will define one and only one cut plane for the bone resectioning.
With reference to
To ensure this single possible fitting of the jig to the femur, the respective plates or blocks 11 and 12 of the jig have sets of projections with curved contact surfaces 13′ through 17′ which are dimensioned according to a specific patient's bone dimensions. For the femur, medial and lateral anterior feet 13 and 14 of the femoral jig contact (a) anterior sides of the lateral and medial condyles, while medial and lateral posterior feet 15 and 16 of the jig contact (b) the distal condylar surfaces. A short posterior projection 17 from the joint of the front and end plates 11 and 12 of the jig also contacts (c) the trochlear groove surfaces. The medial and lateral anterior feet 13 and 14 extend rearward from the front plate or block 11, one on the medial side 13 and one on the lateral side 14, and have concave interior surfaces 13′ and 14′ whose placement and separation from one another closely match the placement and separation of the anterior sides of the respective lateral and medial condyles. Medial and lateral posterior feet 15 and 16 extend in the inferior direction from posterior ends of the end plate or block 12, again one on the medial side 15 and one on the lateral side 16, and have concave inferior surfaces 15′ and 16′ whose placement and separation closely match those of the respective convex, lateral and medial, distal condylar surfaces of the femur. A short posterior projection 17 extending above the end plate or block 12 at or near its junction with the front plate or block 11 has a convex curved surface 17′ that contacts trochlear groove surfaces between the medial and lateral condyles of the femur. Holes 20A-20E for pins allow the jig to be secured to the femur. A notch or groove 21 in the anterior plate 11 aids in jig alignment verification.
With reference to
To ensure this single possible fitting of the jig to the tibia, the respective plates or blocks of the jigs have sets of projections with curved contact surfaces which are dimensioned according to a specific patient's bone dimensions. For the tibia, the main block 23 of the tibial jig contacts (a) the medial and/or anterior surface of the tibia's shaft along curved surfaces 26′ and 27′, while posterior feet have two sets of projections 28-31 that contact (b) the superior articular surfaces of the lateral and medial condyles at positions anterior of the spine and (c) articular surfaces on lateral and medial slopes of the tibial spine itself. The presence of osteophytes generally does not adversely impact the proper fit of the jigs. Specifically, the main medial plate or block 23 has a concave extension 26 on its interior (boneward) side that contacts the medial surface of the tibia's shaft. Additionally, the front plate or block 24 may have a concave extension 27 on its lateral end that continues the curve defined by the medial block's extension and which contacts the anterior surface of the tibia's shaft. The end extension 25 projects from a superior (upper) surface of the front plate or block 24 and has a pair of posterior feet (i.e., medial and lateral feet) with respective sets of downward projections 28-31. One set of projections (one on each posterior foot), i.e., the more anteriorly located set 28 and 29, has concave curvatures 28′ and 29′ that contact superior articular surfaces of respective medial and lateral condyles at positions anterior of the tibial spine. The second set of projections 30 and 31 (again, one on each posterior foot) likewise has concave curvatures 30 and 31 that contact articular surfaces on respective medial and lateral slopes of the tibial spine itself.
One aspect of the invention is that each jig is patient-specific with custom dimensions determined from MRI slices of the patient's tibio-femoral joint region. Three series of MRI slices are taken of the knee to create respective coronal (front), axial (top) and sagittal (side) views, respectively seen in
With reference to
With reference to
We begin with a translation of the scan origin (x0, y0, z0) to a specified center (xc, yc, zc) of the joint anatomy, such as the intercondylar space where the anterior cruciate ligament attaches to the tibia.
Next, we rotate the coordinates with respect to the newly centered origin. The rotations can be performed in any order, but we start with a coronal rotation θ about the x-z plane, followed by an axial rotation φ about a transformed x′-y′ plane, then sagittal rotation ψ about a further transformed y″-z″ plane.
The first rotation is represented in
An x-y plane point transformation to x′,y′,z′ coordinates follows:
A y-z plane point transformation to x′,y′,z′ coordinates follows:
The second rotation is represented by
An y′-z′ plane point transformation to x″,y″,z″ coordinates follows:
The third rotation is represented by
Yet another plane point transformation to x′″,y′″,z′″ coordinates follows:
where:
where i=1, 2, 3, . . . .
where F is total transformation matrix, n is total number of transformations and Tn−i+1 is (n−i+1st) transformation matrix. Combining the separate transformations into a total transformation matrix is possible here even where the original coronal, axial and sagittal image views are not actually orthogonal to one another. The iteration criteria (which can be different for the coronal, axial and sagittal views; for example, more stringent for the coronal view and least stringent for the sagittal view) are:
|θi+1−θi|<εc
|φi+1−φi|<εa
|ψi+1−ψi<εs
Once the image has been properly transformed, the various dimensions of joint features for the femur and tibia can readily be calculated and used to construct the femoral and tibial jigs of
With reference to
With reference to
This is a divisional application from U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/239,329 filed on Jan. 3, 2019, which claimed priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) from U.S. provisional application No. 62/628,117 filed on Feb. 8, 2018.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
8588892 | Hladio et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8608749 | Meridew et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8702686 | Geebelen et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8706197 | Henning et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8979856 | Catanzarite et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9066727 | Catanzarite et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9339226 | van der Walt et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9339281 | Keepler et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9579112 | Catanrarite et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9649160 | van der Walt et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9775725 | van der Walt et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9852509 | Park | Dec 2017 | B2 |
9883871 | Park | Feb 2018 | B2 |
10139807 | Park | Nov 2018 | B2 |
10163270 | Gotte et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10231745 | Geebelen et al. | Mar 2019 | B2 |
10350089 | Hook et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
10413308 | Stemniski | Sep 2019 | B2 |
10762623 | Geebelen et al. | Sep 2020 | B2 |
10918439 | Haidacher et al. | Feb 2021 | B2 |
11229419 | Zou | Jan 2022 | B2 |
11653933 | Fritzinger | May 2023 | B2 |
11727563 | Hu | Aug 2023 | B2 |
11769251 | Mosnier | Sep 2023 | B2 |
11779347 | Carroll | Oct 2023 | B2 |
11806242 | Mahfouz | Nov 2023 | B2 |
11832887 | Otto | Dec 2023 | B2 |
11839548 | Unis | Dec 2023 | B2 |
11849957 | Couture | Dec 2023 | B2 |
20070276224 | Lang et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20110184419 | Meridew et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110282473 | Pavlovskaia et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20130150862 | Aram et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20140115872 | Steines et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140148809 | Schmalzried et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20150088142 | Gibson | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150105698 | Park | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150182292 | Hladio et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20180296226 | Park | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20190223886 | Fritzinger | Jul 2019 | A1 |
20210335041 | Haslam | Oct 2021 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO2010063117 | Jun 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Software User Manual, “SurgiCase Knee Planner”, Ver 3.3, Jun. 6, 2018, materialize.com, Belgium, 49 pages. |
Software User Guide revision 2.0, “TraumaCAD”, Ver 2.5, Jan. 31, 2019, 114 pages. |
A. Durandet et al., “Radiographic analysis of lower limb axial alignments”, Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering, 2013, vol. II, WCE 2013, Jul. 3-5, 2013 London UK, 6 pages. |
H. Kawakami et al., “Effects of rotation on measurement of lower limb alignment for knee osteotomy”, Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 22, 2004, pp. 1248-1253. |
R.G. Marx et al., “Reliability of lower extremity alignment measurement using radiographs and PACS”, Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2011, 19:1693-1698. |
G. McDaniel et al., A comparison of five approaches to measurement of anatomic knee alignment from radiographs, NIH Public Access, Author Manuscript, Osteoarthritis Cartilage, Feb. 2010, 18(2): 273. |
U. Prakash et al., “Computerised measurement of tibiofemoral alignment”, Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br), vol. 83-B, No. 6, Aug. 2001, pp. 819-824. |
M. Roland et al., “Virtual axis finder: a new method to determine the two kinematic axes of rotation for the tibio-femoral joint”, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, Jan. 2010, vol. 132, 9 pages. |
E.A. Sled et al., “Reliability of lower limb alignment measures using an established landmark-based method with a customized computer software program”, NIH Public Access, Author Manuscript, Rheumatol Int., Jan. 2011, 31(1), 71-77, 14 pages. |
T. Takahashi et al., “A new computer-assisted method for measuring the tibio-femoral angle in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee”, Int'l Cartilage Repair Society, Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 2004, vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 256-259. |
Printout: Lexi Co., Ltd., “Zed View JIGEN”, 3D Total Knee Arthroplasty Pre-Operative Planning Jig-Simulation, May 27, 2010, 2 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 16239329 | Jan 2019 | US |
Child | 17324405 | US |