Robotic assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Journal of Robotic Surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-09 DOI:10.1007/s11701-024-02048-9
Ahmed Daoub, Kaif Qayum, Ravi Patel, Amr Selim, Robin Banerjee
{"title":"Robotic assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.","authors":"Ahmed Daoub, Kaif Qayum, Ravi Patel, Amr Selim, Robin Banerjee","doi":"10.1007/s11701-024-02048-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study is To compare robotic-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on both short- and long-term outcomes A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant studies. The studies included were randomised controlled trials directly comparing robotic-assisted versus conventional TKA. The outcomes were pooled as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval. RevMan software version 5.4 was used for performing the statistical analysis. Nine studies deemed eligible for inclusion. The data showed a significant favouring of robotic-assisted than the conventional TKA in mechanical alignment, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and femoral coronal plane outliers (MD =  - 1.10, 95% CI [- 1.51, - 0.69], p < 0.00001), (MD =  - 1.19, 95% CI [- 2.35, - 0.03], p = 0.04), and (RR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.30, 0.80], p = 0.004), respectively. On the other hand, conventional TKA was better in range of motion-flexion (long-term) than the robotic-assisted one (MD =  - 3.02, 95% CI [- 3.68, - 2.37], p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences between them in knee society score-knee score, knee society score-function score, change in hospital for special surgery (HSS) knee rating scale, and change in range of motion-extension (MD =  - 0.36, 95% CI [- 2.43, 1.70], p = 0.73), (MD =  - 0.34, 95% CI [- 2.36, 1.68], p = 0.74), (MD = 0.78, 95% CI [- 0.84, 2.40], p = 0.34), and (MD = 0.16, 95% [- 1.32, 1.64], p = 0.83), respectively. Robotic-assisted TKA demonstrated better outcomes than conventional TKA in terms of mechanical alignment and WOMAC scores. However, the conventional TKA showed a better range of motion-flexion in the long term. More data are needed to assess long-term outcomes comprehensively.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":"364"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02048-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study is To compare robotic-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on both short- and long-term outcomes A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant studies. The studies included were randomised controlled trials directly comparing robotic-assisted versus conventional TKA. The outcomes were pooled as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval. RevMan software version 5.4 was used for performing the statistical analysis. Nine studies deemed eligible for inclusion. The data showed a significant favouring of robotic-assisted than the conventional TKA in mechanical alignment, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and femoral coronal plane outliers (MD =  - 1.10, 95% CI [- 1.51, - 0.69], p < 0.00001), (MD =  - 1.19, 95% CI [- 2.35, - 0.03], p = 0.04), and (RR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.30, 0.80], p = 0.004), respectively. On the other hand, conventional TKA was better in range of motion-flexion (long-term) than the robotic-assisted one (MD =  - 3.02, 95% CI [- 3.68, - 2.37], p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences between them in knee society score-knee score, knee society score-function score, change in hospital for special surgery (HSS) knee rating scale, and change in range of motion-extension (MD =  - 0.36, 95% CI [- 2.43, 1.70], p = 0.73), (MD =  - 0.34, 95% CI [- 2.36, 1.68], p = 0.74), (MD = 0.78, 95% CI [- 0.84, 2.40], p = 0.34), and (MD = 0.16, 95% [- 1.32, 1.64], p = 0.83), respectively. Robotic-assisted TKA demonstrated better outcomes than conventional TKA in terms of mechanical alignment and WOMAC scores. However, the conventional TKA showed a better range of motion-flexion in the long term. More data are needed to assess long-term outcomes comprehensively.

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
机器人辅助与传统全膝关节置换术:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
本研究旨在比较机器人辅助和传统全膝关节置换术(TKA)的短期和长期疗效。 本研究按照《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目》(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses,PRISMA)指南进行了系统综述。在 PubMed、Cochrane、Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库中搜索了相关研究。纳入的研究均为直接比较机器人辅助与传统 TKA 的随机对照试验。研究结果以平均差(MD)或风险比(RR)及 95% 置信区间进行汇总。使用RevMan软件5.4版进行统计分析。9项研究被认为符合纳入条件。数据显示,在机械对位、西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)以及股骨冠状面异常值方面,机器人辅助TKA明显优于传统TKA(MD = - 1.10,95% CI [- 1.51, - 0.69],P<0.05)。
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
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Body mass index influence on short-term perioperative results in robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. KangDuo surgical robot versus da Vinci robotic system in urologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Risk factors for urinary retention after robot-assisted radical cystectomy with orthotopic neobladder diversion: a multicenter study. Single-port robotic versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The crucial role of 5G, 6G, and fiber in robotic telesurgery.
×
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