瓣膜植入物的计划利用率:有计算机辅助导航和无计算机辅助导航的术前规划比较。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-13 DOI:10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00924
Bradley S Schoch, Kevin A Hao, Jennifer M Traverse, William R Aibinder, Joseph J King, Sandrine Polakovic, Josie Elwell, Ryan W Simovitch, John G Horneff
{"title":"瓣膜植入物的计划利用率:有计算机辅助导航和无计算机辅助导航的术前规划比较。","authors":"Bradley S Schoch, Kevin A Hao, Jennifer M Traverse, William R Aibinder, Joseph J King, Sandrine Polakovic, Josie Elwell, Ryan W Simovitch, John G Horneff","doi":"10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preoperative planning for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is becoming increasingly common. While preoperative planning allows surgeons to determine individualized implant types, utilization of intraoperative navigation improves the accuracy of implant placement and may increase confidence in the preoperative plan. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the rate at which surgeons use a glenoid implant different than their preoperative plan with and without the use of computer navigation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of a multicenter prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was conducted between 2016 and 2022. Inclusion criteria were primary aTSA or rTSA with an available preoperative plan and record of the actual implant used. Change in glenoid implant was defined as a deviation in the final implant from the preoperative plan in regard to backside shape (nonaugmented vs augment or differing augment shape).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 1,915 shoulder arthroplasties (525 aTSA, 1,390 rTSA) performed with preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation and 110 shoulder athroplasties (37 aTSA, 73 rTSA) performed with preoperative planning alone. Overall, the final glenoid implant deviated from the preoperative plan less frequently when intraoperative navigation was used compared with preoperative planning alone (1.9% [n = 36] versus 7.3% [n = 8], P = 0.002). When stratified by procedure, deviation from the preoperative plan occurred significantly less for rTSA when preoperative planning was used with intraoperative navigation versus planning alone (2% [n = 29] versus 11% [n = 8], P < 0.001; OR = 0.17 [95% CI = 0.07 to 0.46]), but not aTSA (1% [n = 7] versus 0% [n = 0], P = 1). Use of intraoperative navigation was independently associated with lower odds of deviation from the preoperative plan on multivariable logistic regression (OR = 0.25 [95% CI = 0.11 to 0.56], P = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Use of intraoperative navigation is associated with increased adherence to the preoperative plan for primary rTSA. Use of navigation may increase surgeon confidence despite known limitations of glenoid visualization during this procedure. This may offer advantages in outpatient surgery centers and smaller hospitals where inventory space may be limited.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Ⅲ, retrospective cohort study.</p>","PeriodicalId":51098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Planned Glenoid Implant Utilization: A Comparison of Preoperative Planning with and Without Computer-Assisted Navigation.\",\"authors\":\"Bradley S Schoch, Kevin A Hao, Jennifer M Traverse, William R Aibinder, Joseph J King, Sandrine Polakovic, Josie Elwell, Ryan W Simovitch, John G Horneff\",\"doi\":\"10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00924\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preoperative planning for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is becoming increasingly common. While preoperative planning allows surgeons to determine individualized implant types, utilization of intraoperative navigation improves the accuracy of implant placement and may increase confidence in the preoperative plan. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the rate at which surgeons use a glenoid implant different than their preoperative plan with and without the use of computer navigation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of a multicenter prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was conducted between 2016 and 2022. Inclusion criteria were primary aTSA or rTSA with an available preoperative plan and record of the actual implant used. Change in glenoid implant was defined as a deviation in the final implant from the preoperative plan in regard to backside shape (nonaugmented vs augment or differing augment shape).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 1,915 shoulder arthroplasties (525 aTSA, 1,390 rTSA) performed with preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation and 110 shoulder athroplasties (37 aTSA, 73 rTSA) performed with preoperative planning alone. Overall, the final glenoid implant deviated from the preoperative plan less frequently when intraoperative navigation was used compared with preoperative planning alone (1.9% [n = 36] versus 7.3% [n = 8], P = 0.002). When stratified by procedure, deviation from the preoperative plan occurred significantly less for rTSA when preoperative planning was used with intraoperative navigation versus planning alone (2% [n = 29] versus 11% [n = 8], P < 0.001; OR = 0.17 [95% CI = 0.07 to 0.46]), but not aTSA (1% [n = 7] versus 0% [n = 0], P = 1). Use of intraoperative navigation was independently associated with lower odds of deviation from the preoperative plan on multivariable logistic regression (OR = 0.25 [95% CI = 0.11 to 0.56], P = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Use of intraoperative navigation is associated with increased adherence to the preoperative plan for primary rTSA. Use of navigation may increase surgeon confidence despite known limitations of glenoid visualization during this procedure. This may offer advantages in outpatient surgery centers and smaller hospitals where inventory space may be limited.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Ⅲ, retrospective cohort study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51098,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00924\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00924","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:解剖型全肩关节置换术(aTSA)和反向全肩关节置换术(rTSA)的术前计划越来越普遍。虽然术前计划允许外科医生确定个性化的植入物类型,但利用术中导航可提高植入物放置的准确性,并可增加对术前计划的信心。本研究的目的是评估和比较外科医生在使用和未使用计算机导航的情况下使用与术前计划不同的盂成形植入物的比例:方法: 在2016年至2022年期间,对一个多中心前瞻性收集的肩关节置换术数据库进行了回顾性审查。纳入标准为有术前计划和实际使用的植入物记录的原发性肩关节置换术(aTSA)或肩关节置换术(rTSA)。盂成形体植入物的变化是指最终植入物与术前计划在背面形状(非增量与增量或不同增量形状)方面的偏差:我们纳入了1,915例通过术前规划和术中导航进行的肩关节置换术(525例aTSA,1,390例rTSA)和110例仅通过术前规划进行的肩关节置换术(37例aTSA,73例rTSA)。总体而言,与仅使用术前规划相比,使用术中导航时最终盂体植入偏离术前规划的情况较少(1.9% [n = 36] 对 7.3% [n = 8],P = 0.002)。如果按手术分层,术前计划与术中导航同时使用时,rTSA与术前计划的偏差显著低于单独使用时(2% [n = 29] 对 11% [n = 8],P < 0.001; OR = 0.17 [95% CI = 0.07 to 0.46]),但aTSA与术前计划的偏差显著低于单独使用时(1% [n = 7] 对 0% [n = 0],P = 1)。在多变量逻辑回归中,术中导航的使用与偏离术前计划的几率较低独立相关(OR = 0.25 [95% CI = 0.11 to 0.56],P = 0.001):结论:术中导航的使用与更严格遵守原发性 RTSA 术前计划有关。使用导航可增加外科医生的信心,尽管在该手术中盂骨可视化存在已知的局限性。这可能为门诊手术中心和库存空间有限的小型医院带来优势:证据级别:Ⅲ,回顾性队列研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Planned Glenoid Implant Utilization: A Comparison of Preoperative Planning with and Without Computer-Assisted Navigation.

Background: Preoperative planning for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is becoming increasingly common. While preoperative planning allows surgeons to determine individualized implant types, utilization of intraoperative navigation improves the accuracy of implant placement and may increase confidence in the preoperative plan. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the rate at which surgeons use a glenoid implant different than their preoperative plan with and without the use of computer navigation.

Methods: A retrospective review of a multicenter prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was conducted between 2016 and 2022. Inclusion criteria were primary aTSA or rTSA with an available preoperative plan and record of the actual implant used. Change in glenoid implant was defined as a deviation in the final implant from the preoperative plan in regard to backside shape (nonaugmented vs augment or differing augment shape).

Results: We included 1,915 shoulder arthroplasties (525 aTSA, 1,390 rTSA) performed with preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation and 110 shoulder athroplasties (37 aTSA, 73 rTSA) performed with preoperative planning alone. Overall, the final glenoid implant deviated from the preoperative plan less frequently when intraoperative navigation was used compared with preoperative planning alone (1.9% [n = 36] versus 7.3% [n = 8], P = 0.002). When stratified by procedure, deviation from the preoperative plan occurred significantly less for rTSA when preoperative planning was used with intraoperative navigation versus planning alone (2% [n = 29] versus 11% [n = 8], P < 0.001; OR = 0.17 [95% CI = 0.07 to 0.46]), but not aTSA (1% [n = 7] versus 0% [n = 0], P = 1). Use of intraoperative navigation was independently associated with lower odds of deviation from the preoperative plan on multivariable logistic regression (OR = 0.25 [95% CI = 0.11 to 0.56], P = 0.001).

Conclusion: Use of intraoperative navigation is associated with increased adherence to the preoperative plan for primary rTSA. Use of navigation may increase surgeon confidence despite known limitations of glenoid visualization during this procedure. This may offer advantages in outpatient surgery centers and smaller hospitals where inventory space may be limited.

Level of evidence: Ⅲ, retrospective cohort study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
529
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons was established in the fall of 1993 by the Academy in response to its membership’s demand for a clinical review journal. Two issues were published the first year, followed by six issues yearly from 1994 through 2004. In September 2005, JAAOS began publishing monthly issues. Each issue includes richly illustrated peer-reviewed articles focused on clinical diagnosis and management. Special features in each issue provide commentary on developments in pharmacotherapeutics, materials and techniques, and computer applications.
期刊最新文献
Understanding the Influence of Single Payer Health Insurance on Socioeconomic Disparities in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) Utilization: A Transnational Analysis. Patellofemoral Instability Part II: Surgical Treatment. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline Summary Management of Osteoarthritis of the Hip. Femoral Head Fractures: Evaluation, Management, and Outcomes. Trends in Preoperative Outcome Measures From 2013 to 2021 in Patients Undergoing Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty.
×
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