Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty versus Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in Medial Compartmental Osteoarthritis: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Early Postoperative Recovery

IF 1.7 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Orthopedic Research and Reviews Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.2147/ORR.S444547
Artit Laoruengthana, Kongpob Reosanguanwong, Piti Rattanaprichavej, Kamonnop Sahasoonthorn, Nopparat Santisathaporn, K. Pongpirul
{"title":"Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty versus Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in Medial Compartmental Osteoarthritis: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Early Postoperative Recovery","authors":"Artit Laoruengthana, Kongpob Reosanguanwong, Piti Rattanaprichavej, Kamonnop Sahasoonthorn, Nopparat Santisathaporn, K. Pongpirul","doi":"10.2147/ORR.S444547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may provide better physiological knee kinematics, proprioception, and quadricep recovery than posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA. Therefore, we hypothesized that CR TKA with multimodal pain control may provide comparable postoperative pain and recovery as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Methods This study included patients with isolated medial compartment knee osteoarthritis who underwent CR TKA and UKA. TKA and UKA patients were propensity score-matched with age and body mass index (BMI) and compared using visual analog scales (VAS) for pain scores, total amount of morphine use (TMU), knee flexion angle, straight leg raise (SLR), independent ambulation, length of hospital stay (LOS), and costs during hospitalization. Results After propensity score matching, 46 patients were included in the TKA and UKA groups, respectively, with no differences in demographic data. VAS at 6–72 h and TMU at 48 h after surgery were comparable between the groups. The knee flexion angle in the UKA group was significantly higher at 24 h (60.0° vs 46.6°; p<0.001) and 48 h (76.9° vs 69.1°; p = 0.021) than that in the TKA group. The SLR in the UKA group was significantly higher than that in the TKA group at 24–72 h. The UKA group ambulated significantly earlier (1.56 vs 2.13 days; p<0.001), had shorter LOS (3.68 vs 4.28 days; p<0.004) and incurred 12.43% lower costs when compared to the TKA group. Conclusion Patients who underwent CR TKA with multimodal pain management did not experience more postoperative pain or morphine use than those who underwent UKA. However, UKA patients seem to experienced faster recovery and shorter LOS than CR-TKA patients during the early postoperative course. Accordingly, UKA may be considered instead of TKA for patients who are good candidates for UKA and require expedited recovery.","PeriodicalId":19608,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S444547","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may provide better physiological knee kinematics, proprioception, and quadricep recovery than posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA. Therefore, we hypothesized that CR TKA with multimodal pain control may provide comparable postoperative pain and recovery as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Methods This study included patients with isolated medial compartment knee osteoarthritis who underwent CR TKA and UKA. TKA and UKA patients were propensity score-matched with age and body mass index (BMI) and compared using visual analog scales (VAS) for pain scores, total amount of morphine use (TMU), knee flexion angle, straight leg raise (SLR), independent ambulation, length of hospital stay (LOS), and costs during hospitalization. Results After propensity score matching, 46 patients were included in the TKA and UKA groups, respectively, with no differences in demographic data. VAS at 6–72 h and TMU at 48 h after surgery were comparable between the groups. The knee flexion angle in the UKA group was significantly higher at 24 h (60.0° vs 46.6°; p<0.001) and 48 h (76.9° vs 69.1°; p = 0.021) than that in the TKA group. The SLR in the UKA group was significantly higher than that in the TKA group at 24–72 h. The UKA group ambulated significantly earlier (1.56 vs 2.13 days; p<0.001), had shorter LOS (3.68 vs 4.28 days; p<0.004) and incurred 12.43% lower costs when compared to the TKA group. Conclusion Patients who underwent CR TKA with multimodal pain management did not experience more postoperative pain or morphine use than those who underwent UKA. However, UKA patients seem to experienced faster recovery and shorter LOS than CR-TKA patients during the early postoperative course. Accordingly, UKA may be considered instead of TKA for patients who are good candidates for UKA and require expedited recovery.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
内侧髁骨关节炎中的十字韧带保留全膝关节置换术与单髁膝关节置换术:术后早期恢复的倾向评分匹配分析
背景 与后稳定型(PS)全膝关节置换术(TKA)相比,韧带固定型(CR)全膝关节置换术(TKA)可提供更好的膝关节生理运动学、本体感觉和股四头肌恢复。因此,我们推测采用多模式疼痛控制的 CR TKA 术后疼痛和恢复效果可能与单关节膝关节置换术(UKA)相当。方法 本研究纳入了接受 CR TKA 和 UKA 的孤立内侧室膝关节骨关节炎患者。根据年龄和体重指数(BMI)对TKA和UKA患者进行倾向评分匹配,并使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)对疼痛评分、吗啡使用总量(TMU)、膝关节屈曲角度、直腿抬高(SLR)、独立行走、住院时间(LOS)和住院期间的费用进行比较。结果 经过倾向评分匹配后,TKA组和UKA组分别有46名患者,人口统计学数据无差异。两组患者术后 6-72 小时的 VAS 和 48 小时的 TMU 值相当。UKA组的膝关节屈曲角度在24小时(60.0° vs 46.6°;p<0.001)和48小时(76.9° vs 69.1°;p = 0.021)明显高于TKA组。与 TKA 组相比,UKA 组患者下床活动时间明显提前(1.56 天 vs 2.13 天;p<0.001),LOS(3.68 天 vs 4.28 天;p<0.004)缩短,费用降低 12.43%。结论 与接受UKA的患者相比,接受多模式疼痛治疗的CR TKA患者并没有经历更多的术后疼痛或吗啡使用量。然而,在术后早期,UKA 患者似乎比 CR-TKA 患者恢复更快,住院时间更短。因此,对于那些适合接受UKA且需要尽快恢复的患者,可以考虑用UKA代替TKA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Orthopedic Research and Reviews
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Research and Reviews is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the patho-physiology of the musculoskeletal system, trauma, surgery and other corrective interventions to restore mobility and function. Advances in new technologies, materials, techniques and pharmacological agents will be particularly welcome. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Patho-physiology and bioengineering, Technologies and materials science, Surgical techniques, including robotics, Trauma management and care, Treatment including pharmacological and non-pharmacological, Rehabilitation and Multidisciplinarian care approaches, Patient quality of life, satisfaction and preference, Health economic evaluations. The journal welcomes submitted papers covering original research, basic science and technology, clinical studies, reviews and evaluations, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary, case reports and extended reports.
期刊最新文献
3D Printing for Personalized Solutions in Cervical Spondylosis. Reconstruction of a Short Tibial Stump with a Long Fibula Using the Ilizarov Technique: A Case Study. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury. Open Reduction and Fixation of Late-Presenting Pediatric Supracondylar Humeral Fractures: A Prospective Study. Biomechanical Characteristics of Kissing Spine During Extension Using a Human Cadaveric Lumbar Spinal Model.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1