Fabio Mancino, Andreas Fontalis, Tarani S P Grandhi, Ahmed Magan, Ricci Plastow, Babar Kayani, Fares S Haddad
{"title":"机器人手臂辅助单关节膝关节置换术转为全膝关节置换术。","authors":"Fabio Mancino, Andreas Fontalis, Tarani S P Grandhi, Ahmed Magan, Ricci Plastow, Babar Kayani, Fares S Haddad","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.106B7.BJJ-2023-0943.R2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers accurate and reproducible guidance in component positioning and assessment of soft-tissue tensioning during knee arthroplasty, but the feasibility and early outcomes when using this technology for revision surgery remain unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic arm-assisted revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus primary robotic arm-assisted TKA at short-term follow-up.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study included 16 patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA versus 35 matched patients receiving robotic arm-assisted primary TKA. In all study patients, the following data were recorded: operating time, polyethylene liner size, change in haemoglobin concentration (g/dl), length of inpatient stay, postoperative complications, and hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment. All procedures were performed using the principles of functional alignment. At most recent follow-up, range of motion (ROM), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were collected. Mean follow-up time was 21 months (6 to 36).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences between the two treatment groups with regard to mean change in haemoglobin concentration (p = 0.477), length of stay (LOS, p = 0.172), mean polyethylene thickness (p = 0.065), or postoperative complication rates (p = 0.295). At the most recent follow-up, the primary robotic arm-assisted TKA group had a statistically significantly improved OKS compared with the revision UKA to TKA group (44.6 (SD 2.7) vs 42.3 (SD 2.5); p = 0.004) but there was no difference in the overall ROM (p = 0.056) or FJS between the two treatment groups (86.1 (SD 9.6) vs 84.1 (4.9); p = 0.439).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA was associated with comparable intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative rehabilitation, functional outcomes, and complications to primary robotic TKA at short-term follow-up. Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers a safe and reproducible technique for revising failed UKA to TKA.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"106-B 7","pages":"680-687"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Robotic arm-assisted conversion of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Fabio Mancino, Andreas Fontalis, Tarani S P Grandhi, Ahmed Magan, Ricci Plastow, Babar Kayani, Fares S Haddad\",\"doi\":\"10.1302/0301-620X.106B7.BJJ-2023-0943.R2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers accurate and reproducible guidance in component positioning and assessment of soft-tissue tensioning during knee arthroplasty, but the feasibility and early outcomes when using this technology for revision surgery remain unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic arm-assisted revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus primary robotic arm-assisted TKA at short-term follow-up.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study included 16 patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA versus 35 matched patients receiving robotic arm-assisted primary TKA. In all study patients, the following data were recorded: operating time, polyethylene liner size, change in haemoglobin concentration (g/dl), length of inpatient stay, postoperative complications, and hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment. All procedures were performed using the principles of functional alignment. At most recent follow-up, range of motion (ROM), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were collected. Mean follow-up time was 21 months (6 to 36).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences between the two treatment groups with regard to mean change in haemoglobin concentration (p = 0.477), length of stay (LOS, p = 0.172), mean polyethylene thickness (p = 0.065), or postoperative complication rates (p = 0.295). At the most recent follow-up, the primary robotic arm-assisted TKA group had a statistically significantly improved OKS compared with the revision UKA to TKA group (44.6 (SD 2.7) vs 42.3 (SD 2.5); p = 0.004) but there was no difference in the overall ROM (p = 0.056) or FJS between the two treatment groups (86.1 (SD 9.6) vs 84.1 (4.9); p = 0.439).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA was associated with comparable intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative rehabilitation, functional outcomes, and complications to primary robotic TKA at short-term follow-up. Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers a safe and reproducible technique for revising failed UKA to TKA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone & Joint Journal\",\"volume\":\"106-B 7\",\"pages\":\"680-687\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone & Joint Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.106B7.BJJ-2023-0943.R2\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.106B7.BJJ-2023-0943.R2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:机器人手臂辅助手术为膝关节置换术中的部件定位和软组织张力评估提供了准确、可重复的指导,但将该技术用于翻修手术的可行性和早期疗效仍不得而知。本研究的目的是比较机器人手臂辅助单间室膝关节置换术(UKA)翻修为全膝关节置换术(TKA)与初级机器人手臂辅助TKA的短期随访结果:这项前瞻性研究包括16名接受机器人手臂辅助UKA翻修至TKA的患者与35名接受机器人手臂辅助初级TKA的匹配患者。研究记录了所有患者的以下数据:手术时间、聚乙烯衬垫尺寸、血红蛋白浓度变化(g/dl)、住院时间、术后并发症和髋-膝-踝(HKA)对位。所有手术均按照功能性对齐原则进行。在最近的随访中,收集了运动范围(ROM)、Forgotten关节评分(FJS)和牛津膝关节评分(OKS)。平均随访时间为21个月(6至36个月):结果:两个治疗组在血红蛋白浓度平均变化(p = 0.477)、住院时间(LOS,p = 0.172)、聚乙烯平均厚度(p = 0.065)或术后并发症发生率(p = 0.295)方面没有差异。在最近的随访中,与UKA改TKA翻修组(44.6(标清2.7) vs 42.3(标清2.5);p = 0.004)相比,机器人手臂辅助TKA初治组的OKS有显著统计学改善,但两组治疗的总体ROM(p = 0.056)或FJS(86.1(标清9.6) vs 84.1(4.9);p = 0.439)没有差异:结论:在短期随访中,机器人手臂辅助UKA翻修为TKA的术中失血量、术后早期康复、功能结果和并发症与初级机器人TKA相当。机器人手臂辅助手术为将失败的UKA翻修为TKA提供了一种安全且可重复的技术。
Robotic arm-assisted conversion of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty.
Aims: Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers accurate and reproducible guidance in component positioning and assessment of soft-tissue tensioning during knee arthroplasty, but the feasibility and early outcomes when using this technology for revision surgery remain unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic arm-assisted revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus primary robotic arm-assisted TKA at short-term follow-up.
Methods: This prospective study included 16 patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA versus 35 matched patients receiving robotic arm-assisted primary TKA. In all study patients, the following data were recorded: operating time, polyethylene liner size, change in haemoglobin concentration (g/dl), length of inpatient stay, postoperative complications, and hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment. All procedures were performed using the principles of functional alignment. At most recent follow-up, range of motion (ROM), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were collected. Mean follow-up time was 21 months (6 to 36).
Results: There were no differences between the two treatment groups with regard to mean change in haemoglobin concentration (p = 0.477), length of stay (LOS, p = 0.172), mean polyethylene thickness (p = 0.065), or postoperative complication rates (p = 0.295). At the most recent follow-up, the primary robotic arm-assisted TKA group had a statistically significantly improved OKS compared with the revision UKA to TKA group (44.6 (SD 2.7) vs 42.3 (SD 2.5); p = 0.004) but there was no difference in the overall ROM (p = 0.056) or FJS between the two treatment groups (86.1 (SD 9.6) vs 84.1 (4.9); p = 0.439).
Conclusion: Robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA was associated with comparable intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative rehabilitation, functional outcomes, and complications to primary robotic TKA at short-term follow-up. Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers a safe and reproducible technique for revising failed UKA to TKA.
期刊介绍:
We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.