机器人辅助与传统手术在内侧单腔膝关节置换术中的比较:临床和放射学研究。

IF 4.1 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Knee Surgery & Related Research Pub Date : 2021-02-12 DOI:10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2
Roberto Negrín, Jaime Duboy, Magaly Iñiguez, Nicolás O Reyes, Maximiliano Barahona, Gonzalo Ferrer, Carlos Infante, Nicolás Jabes
{"title":"机器人辅助与传统手术在内侧单腔膝关节置换术中的比较:临床和放射学研究。","authors":"Roberto Negrín,&nbsp;Jaime Duboy,&nbsp;Magaly Iñiguez,&nbsp;Nicolás O Reyes,&nbsp;Maximiliano Barahona,&nbsp;Gonzalo Ferrer,&nbsp;Carlos Infante,&nbsp;Nicolás Jabes","doi":"10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has increased and new technologies have been developed to improve patient survival and satisfaction, soft tissue balance, alignment, and component size. Robot-assisted systems offer an increase in surgical precision and accuracy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the precision of component position using five radiological parameters in conventional and robotic-assisted medial UKA using the NAVIO system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cohort study was designed for patients who underwent medial UKA between April 2017 and March 2019 in a single center. Patients were allocated in the conventional (UKA-C) or robotic-assisted (UKA-R) group. The variables analyzed were age, gender, affected knee side, length of hospital stay, surgical time, and radiological measurements such as anatomical medial distal femoral angle (aMDFA), anatomical medial proximal tibial angle (aMPTA), tibial slope, the sagittal femoral angle, and the component size. A target was defined for each measurement, and a successful UKA was defined if at least four radiological measures were on target after surgery. Also, patients' reported outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and a numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-four patients were included, 18 of them underwent UKA-R. The success rate for UKA in the UKA-R group was 87%; meanwhile, in the UKA-C group this was 28%, this difference was significant and powered (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.001; 1 - β = 0.95). Also, a 5-point difference in favor of the UKA-R group in the median OKS (p = 0.01), and a significantly lower median NRS for pain (p < 0.000) were found after surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>UKA-R achieved more precision in the radiological parameters' measure in this study. Also, UKA-R has a trend towards a better OKS and a lower NRS for pain at short-term follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":17886,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","volume":"33 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study.\",\"authors\":\"Roberto Negrín,&nbsp;Jaime Duboy,&nbsp;Magaly Iñiguez,&nbsp;Nicolás O Reyes,&nbsp;Maximiliano Barahona,&nbsp;Gonzalo Ferrer,&nbsp;Carlos Infante,&nbsp;Nicolás Jabes\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has increased and new technologies have been developed to improve patient survival and satisfaction, soft tissue balance, alignment, and component size. Robot-assisted systems offer an increase in surgical precision and accuracy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the precision of component position using five radiological parameters in conventional and robotic-assisted medial UKA using the NAVIO system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cohort study was designed for patients who underwent medial UKA between April 2017 and March 2019 in a single center. Patients were allocated in the conventional (UKA-C) or robotic-assisted (UKA-R) group. The variables analyzed were age, gender, affected knee side, length of hospital stay, surgical time, and radiological measurements such as anatomical medial distal femoral angle (aMDFA), anatomical medial proximal tibial angle (aMPTA), tibial slope, the sagittal femoral angle, and the component size. A target was defined for each measurement, and a successful UKA was defined if at least four radiological measures were on target after surgery. Also, patients' reported outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and a numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-four patients were included, 18 of them underwent UKA-R. The success rate for UKA in the UKA-R group was 87%; meanwhile, in the UKA-C group this was 28%, this difference was significant and powered (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.001; 1 - β = 0.95). Also, a 5-point difference in favor of the UKA-R group in the median OKS (p = 0.01), and a significantly lower median NRS for pain (p < 0.000) were found after surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>UKA-R achieved more precision in the radiological parameters' measure in this study. Also, UKA-R has a trend towards a better OKS and a lower NRS for pain at short-term follow-up.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Knee Surgery & Related Research\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Knee Surgery & Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

背景:单室膝关节置换术(UKA)的使用越来越多,新技术的发展提高了患者的生存率和满意度,软组织平衡,对齐和部件尺寸。机器人辅助系统提高了手术的精确度和准确性。本研究的目的是使用NAVIO系统评估传统和机器人辅助医疗UKA中使用五个放射学参数的部件位置精度。方法:对2017年4月至2019年3月期间接受医学UKA的患者进行单中心队列研究。患者被分为常规组(UKA-C)和机器人辅助组(UKA-R)。分析的变量包括年龄、性别、受影响的膝侧、住院时间、手术时间和放射学测量,如解剖性股骨内侧远端角(aMDFA)、解剖性胫骨内侧近端角(aMPTA)、胫骨斜率、股骨矢状角和部件大小。为每次测量定义一个目标,如果手术后至少有四项放射测量达到目标,则定义成功的UKA。此外,使用牛津膝关节评分(OKS)和疼痛数值评定量表(NRS)对患者报告的结果进行评估。结果:纳入34例患者,其中18例行UKA-R。UKA- r组UKA成功率为87%;与此同时,在UKA-C组中,这一比例为28%,这一差异非常显著(Fisher精确检验,p = 0.001;1 - β = 0.95)。此外,UKA-R组在中位OKS (p = 0.01)和疼痛的中位NRS (p)上有5个点的差异(p)。结论:UKA-R在本研究中获得了更高的放射学参数测量精度。此外,UKA-R在短期随访中有更好的OKS和更低的NRS的趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study.

Background: The use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has increased and new technologies have been developed to improve patient survival and satisfaction, soft tissue balance, alignment, and component size. Robot-assisted systems offer an increase in surgical precision and accuracy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the precision of component position using five radiological parameters in conventional and robotic-assisted medial UKA using the NAVIO system.

Methods: A cohort study was designed for patients who underwent medial UKA between April 2017 and March 2019 in a single center. Patients were allocated in the conventional (UKA-C) or robotic-assisted (UKA-R) group. The variables analyzed were age, gender, affected knee side, length of hospital stay, surgical time, and radiological measurements such as anatomical medial distal femoral angle (aMDFA), anatomical medial proximal tibial angle (aMPTA), tibial slope, the sagittal femoral angle, and the component size. A target was defined for each measurement, and a successful UKA was defined if at least four radiological measures were on target after surgery. Also, patients' reported outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and a numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain.

Results: Thirty-four patients were included, 18 of them underwent UKA-R. The success rate for UKA in the UKA-R group was 87%; meanwhile, in the UKA-C group this was 28%, this difference was significant and powered (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.001; 1 - β = 0.95). Also, a 5-point difference in favor of the UKA-R group in the median OKS (p = 0.01), and a significantly lower median NRS for pain (p < 0.000) were found after surgery.

Conclusions: UKA-R achieved more precision in the radiological parameters' measure in this study. Also, UKA-R has a trend towards a better OKS and a lower NRS for pain at short-term follow-up.

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
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analysis of radiographic factors affecting the significant differences in knee alignment between hip-to-talus and hip-to-calcaneus radiographs after opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy Ramp lesion in anterior cruciate ligament injury: a review of the anatomy, biomechanics, epidemiology, and diagnosis. Total knee arthroplasty in dialysis patients: a national in-patient sample-based study of perioperative complications. Does body mass index influence improvement in patient reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty? A retrospective analysis of 3918 cases. Home ownership, full-time employment, and other markers of higher socioeconomic status are predictive of shorter time to initial evaluation, shorter time to surgery, and superior postoperative outcomes among lateral patellar instability patients undergoing medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction.
×
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