Bäthis H, Shafizadeh S, Paffrath T, Simanski C, Grifka J, Lüring C
Klinik für Unfallchirurgie und Orthopädie, Lehrstuhl der Universität Witten-Herdecke, Städtische Kliniken Köln-Merheim, Ostmerheimer Strasse 200, 51109 Köln, Deutschland.
Orthopade. 2006 Oct;35(10):1056-65. doi: 10.1007/s00132-006-1001-3.
Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) has become established in many hospitals throughout the world, especially in the form of computer navigation for total knee replacement (TKR). Analysis of the studies available revealed 18 comparative studies examining the precision of implantation of knee endoprostheses following CAS and after implantation by the conventional technique. In a meta-analysis of 13 studies in which the same safe zone of +/-3 from neutral alignment was defined for the leg axis, a total of 1,784 TKR were performed. In the group of patients in whom the conventional technique was used, 75.6% (654/865) of TKR were implanted within the safe zone. In the CAS group 93.9% (863/919) of the prostheses were implanted within the safe zone (p<0.0001). The differences between the groups were statistically significant in 11 of the 13 studies, and the difference between groups for the entire patient population is highly significant. Only limited clinical results were ascertained in these comparative studies; there were no great differences between the treatment groups in clinical course.
计算机辅助手术（CAS）已在全球许多医院得到应用，尤其是在全膝关节置换术（TKR）的计算机导航方面。对现有研究的分析显示，有18项比较研究考察了CAS和传统技术植入膝关节假体后的植入精度。在一项对13项研究的荟萃分析中，为下肢轴线定义了相同的±3中立对线安全区，共进行了1784例TKR。在使用传统技术的患者组中，75.6%（654/865）的TKR植入在安全区内。在CAS组中，93.9%（863/919）的假体植入在安全区内（p<0.0001）。13项研究中有11项研究组间差异具有统计学意义，整个患者群体的组间差异高度显著。在这些比较研究中仅确定了有限的临床结果；治疗组在临床过程中没有很大差异。
