一项回顾性研究比较单坐与双坐双侧全膝关节置换术的早期结果

J. Wadhwani, R. Siwach, Ravi Sihag, P. Kamboj, Karan Siwach
{"title":"一项回顾性研究比较单坐与双坐双侧全膝关节置换术的早期结果","authors":"J. Wadhwani, R. Siwach, Ravi Sihag, P. Kamboj, Karan Siwach","doi":"10.4103/jotr.jotr_78_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: We aimed to conduct a study comparing early outcomes of bilateral total knee replacement (BTKR) done in single sitting versus double sitting. Materials and Methods: The study included 58 patients who were already operated case of BTKR done in single sitting (sequential BTKR) – Group I (n = 30) and double sitting (staged BTKR) – Group II (n = 27), during time period April 2016 to May 2019. At follow-up, functional outcome in both the groups was assessed by Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis (OA) Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index score, and Visual Analog Scale scores. Results: The mean age in Group I was 64.5 ± 10.52 years and in Group II was 63.92 ± 5.76 years. The mean body mass index (BMI) in Group I was 28.42 ± 1.365 kg/m2, whereas the mean BMI in Group II was 29.19 ± 1.898 kg/m2. The mean length of hospital stay in Group I was 15.23 ± 2.921 days as compared to 23.69 ± 5.259 days in Group II. There was no mortality in both the groups within 90 days after operation in both the groups. There was significantly less requirement of hospital stay in Group I as compared to Group II (P = 0.001, Mann–Whitney U-test). Conclusion: We found that the single sitting BTKR is cost-effective and a relatively safe surgery. There was significantly lower length of hospital stay in single sitting BTKR along with no major complication in our study. Thus we advocate BTKR as a single sitting surgery with proper patient selection and preanesthetic workup.","PeriodicalId":34195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopedics Traumatology and Rehabilitation","volume":"25 1","pages":"13 - 17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A retrospective study to compare early outcomes of bilateral total knee replacement done in single sitting versus double sitting\",\"authors\":\"J. Wadhwani, R. Siwach, Ravi Sihag, P. Kamboj, Karan Siwach\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jotr.jotr_78_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: We aimed to conduct a study comparing early outcomes of bilateral total knee replacement (BTKR) done in single sitting versus double sitting. Materials and Methods: The study included 58 patients who were already operated case of BTKR done in single sitting (sequential BTKR) – Group I (n = 30) and double sitting (staged BTKR) – Group II (n = 27), during time period April 2016 to May 2019. At follow-up, functional outcome in both the groups was assessed by Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis (OA) Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index score, and Visual Analog Scale scores. Results: The mean age in Group I was 64.5 ± 10.52 years and in Group II was 63.92 ± 5.76 years. The mean body mass index (BMI) in Group I was 28.42 ± 1.365 kg/m2, whereas the mean BMI in Group II was 29.19 ± 1.898 kg/m2. The mean length of hospital stay in Group I was 15.23 ± 2.921 days as compared to 23.69 ± 5.259 days in Group II. There was no mortality in both the groups within 90 days after operation in both the groups. There was significantly less requirement of hospital stay in Group I as compared to Group II (P = 0.001, Mann–Whitney U-test). Conclusion: We found that the single sitting BTKR is cost-effective and a relatively safe surgery. There was significantly lower length of hospital stay in single sitting BTKR along with no major complication in our study. Thus we advocate BTKR as a single sitting surgery with proper patient selection and preanesthetic workup.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopedics Traumatology and Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"13 - 17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopedics Traumatology and Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jotr.jotr_78_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopedics Traumatology and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jotr.jotr_78_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们旨在进行一项研究,比较单坐与双坐双侧全膝关节置换术(BTKR)的早期结果。材料与方法:本研究纳入58例已行单坐位(顺序式BTKR) - I组(n = 30)和双坐位(分期式BTKR) - II组(n = 27)手术的患者,时间为2016年4月至2019年5月。在随访中,两组的功能结局通过膝关节损伤和骨关节炎(OA)结局评分、西安大略大学和麦克马斯特大学OA指数评分和视觉模拟量表评分进行评估。结果:ⅰ组患者平均年龄64.5±10.52岁,ⅱ组患者平均年龄63.92±5.76岁。组平均体重指数(BMI)为28.42±1.365 kg/m2,组平均BMI为29.19±1.898 kg/m2。组患者平均住院时间15.23±2.921天,组患者平均住院时间23.69±5.259天。术后90 d内两组患者均无死亡。I组住院时间要求显著低于II组(P = 0.001, Mann-Whitney u检验)。结论:单坐位BTKR是一种经济、安全的手术。在我们的研究中,单坐式BTKR的住院时间明显较短,且无重大并发症。因此,我们提倡BTKR作为单坐式手术,适当的患者选择和麻醉前检查。
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
A retrospective study to compare early outcomes of bilateral total knee replacement done in single sitting versus double sitting
Aim: We aimed to conduct a study comparing early outcomes of bilateral total knee replacement (BTKR) done in single sitting versus double sitting. Materials and Methods: The study included 58 patients who were already operated case of BTKR done in single sitting (sequential BTKR) – Group I (n = 30) and double sitting (staged BTKR) – Group II (n = 27), during time period April 2016 to May 2019. At follow-up, functional outcome in both the groups was assessed by Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis (OA) Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index score, and Visual Analog Scale scores. Results: The mean age in Group I was 64.5 ± 10.52 years and in Group II was 63.92 ± 5.76 years. The mean body mass index (BMI) in Group I was 28.42 ± 1.365 kg/m2, whereas the mean BMI in Group II was 29.19 ± 1.898 kg/m2. The mean length of hospital stay in Group I was 15.23 ± 2.921 days as compared to 23.69 ± 5.259 days in Group II. There was no mortality in both the groups within 90 days after operation in both the groups. There was significantly less requirement of hospital stay in Group I as compared to Group II (P = 0.001, Mann–Whitney U-test). Conclusion: We found that the single sitting BTKR is cost-effective and a relatively safe surgery. There was significantly lower length of hospital stay in single sitting BTKR along with no major complication in our study. Thus we advocate BTKR as a single sitting surgery with proper patient selection and preanesthetic workup.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Spinal instrumentation in the setting of nontuberculous spondylodiscitis: A prospective analysis Comparative evaluation of postoperative incisional negative pressure wound therapy with conventional dressings in patients of proximal tibia fracture managed by dual plating Are we really improving the quality of life after hemiarthroplasty of the hip in the elderly? An observational study Successful outcome in posttraumatic superficial femoral artery pseudoaneurysm following distal femur fracture Bilateral outpatient total knee arthroplasty – Is it feasible, safe, and worth considering: A pilot 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