Intraoperative imaging in hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Arthroplasty Pub Date : 2023-04-07 DOI:10.1186/s42836-023-00173-8
Yannic Lecoultre, Jan Danek, Ingmar F Rompen, Bryan J M van de Wall, Pascal C Haefeli, Frank J P Beeres, Reto Babst, Björn C Link
{"title":"Intraoperative imaging in hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.","authors":"Yannic Lecoultre,&nbsp;Jan Danek,&nbsp;Ingmar F Rompen,&nbsp;Bryan J M van de Wall,&nbsp;Pascal C Haefeli,&nbsp;Frank J P Beeres,&nbsp;Reto Babst,&nbsp;Björn C Link","doi":"10.1186/s42836-023-00173-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intraoperative fluoroscopy (IFC) is gaining popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA), with the aim to achieve better component positioning and therefore eventually reduced revision rates. This meta-analysis investigated the benefit of IFC by comparing it to intraoperative assessment alone. The primary outcome was component positioning and the secondary outcomes included complications and revision rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Effect estimates for radiographic cup position, offset/leg length difference and outliers from a safe zone were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as a weighted odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 10 observational studies involving 1,394 patients were included. No randomized trials were found. IFC showed no significant reduction in acetabular cup position (inclination and anteversion), offset, leg-length discrepancies, revision (none reported) or overall complication rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current meta-analysis found no differences in cup positioning, offset, leg length discrepancy, the incidence of complications or revision surgery. It should be acknowledged that the included studies were generally performed by experienced surgeons. The benefit of intraoperative fluoroscopy might become more evident at an early phase of the learning curve for this procedure. Therefore, its role has yet to be defined.</p>","PeriodicalId":52831,"journal":{"name":"Arthroplasty","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10080809/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-023-00173-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Intraoperative fluoroscopy (IFC) is gaining popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA), with the aim to achieve better component positioning and therefore eventually reduced revision rates. This meta-analysis investigated the benefit of IFC by comparing it to intraoperative assessment alone. The primary outcome was component positioning and the secondary outcomes included complications and revision rates.

Methods: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Effect estimates for radiographic cup position, offset/leg length difference and outliers from a safe zone were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as a weighted odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

Results: A total of 10 observational studies involving 1,394 patients were included. No randomized trials were found. IFC showed no significant reduction in acetabular cup position (inclination and anteversion), offset, leg-length discrepancies, revision (none reported) or overall complication rates.

Conclusion: The current meta-analysis found no differences in cup positioning, offset, leg length discrepancy, the incidence of complications or revision surgery. It should be acknowledged that the included studies were generally performed by experienced surgeons. The benefit of intraoperative fluoroscopy might become more evident at an early phase of the learning curve for this procedure. Therefore, its role has yet to be defined.

Abstract Image

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
髋关节置换术中成像:随机对照试验和观察性研究的荟萃分析和系统综述。
背景:术中透视(IFC)在全髋关节置换术(THA)中越来越受欢迎,目的是实现更好的假体定位,从而最终降低翻修率。本荟萃分析通过将IFC与单纯术中评估进行比较来调查IFC的益处。主要结果是组件定位,次要结果包括并发症和翻修率。方法:检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库,包括随机临床试验(RCT)和观察性研究。使用随机效应模型将x线照相杯位、偏移/腿长差异和安全区域异常值的效应估计汇总在一起,并以加权优势比(OR)表示,并给出相应的95%置信区间(95% CI)。结果:共纳入10项观察性研究,涉及1394例患者。未发现随机试验。IFC显示髋臼杯位置(倾斜和前倾)、偏置、腿长差异、翻修(无报道)或总体并发症发生率均无显著降低。结论:目前的荟萃分析发现,在杯位、偏置、腿长差异、并发症发生率或翻修手术方面没有差异。应该承认,纳入的研究通常是由经验丰富的外科医生进行的。术中透视的好处可能在该手术的学习曲线的早期阶段变得更加明显。因此,它的作用还有待界定。
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
Arthroplasty
Arthroplasty ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
A 10-point preoperative checklist: selecting patients for outpatient joint replacement surgery. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of three superficial skin closure methods for multi-layer wound closure in total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Conversion of UKA to TKA using identical standard implants-How does it compare to primary UKA, primary TKA and revision TKA? Reliability of pre-resection ligament tension assessment in imageless robotic assisted total knee replacement. Should we be concerned when the anterior approach to the hip goes accidentally medial? A retrospective study.
×
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