Suppr超能文献

两种微创全膝关节置换植入器械的比较。

Comparison of two minimally invasive implantation instrument-sets for total knee arthroplasty.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Teaching Hospital, Medical University of Innsbruck, Carinagasse 47, 6800 Feldkirch, Austria.

出版信息

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010 Mar;18(3):359-66. doi: 10.1007/s00167-009-0957-z. Epub 2009 Oct 22.

Abstract

Several choices of instrument systems are available for minimally invasive surgical approaches. There are reports that one alternative, the quadriceps sparing, side-cutting instrumentation, results in diminished implantation accuracy. A total of 108 patients were randomized to undergo TKA either using side-cutting implant instrumentation (Group A) or anterior-posterior mini-incision instrumentation (Group B). All TKAs were operated on with a minimal invasive, mini-midvastus surgical approach. 50% of the TKAs were performed with computer-assistance in each cohort. The radiographic parameters, clinical outcomes and knee scores were evaluated preoperatively and 3 months postoperative. In Group B, we found significantly higher accuracy for the mechanical axis of the limb (range +/-3 degrees: Group A 54% versus Group B 89%, p = <0.001), medial proximal tibial angle (range +/-3 degrees: Group A 85% versus Group B 98%, p = <0.027) and tibial slope (range +/-3 degrees: Group A 59% versus Group B 85%, p = <0.007). The application of the navigation system could only significantly reduce outliers (accuracy >3 degrees) in Group B. Clinical outcomes and knee scores were similar in both groups and were not influenced by computer-assistance. Using the anterior-posterior, mini-incision instruments for minimally invasive TKA will lead to higher implantation accuracy when compared to the quadriceps sparing side-cutting instrumentation. The navigation technique could not compensate for shortcomings of the side-cutting instrumentation. The clinical relevance of this study is that the quadriceps sparing side-cutting instrumentation should not be used for TKA because of unacceptable reduced implantation accuracy.

摘要

有几种仪器系统可供选择用于微创外科手术。有报道称,一种替代方法,即股四头肌保留、侧切器械,会导致植入物准确性降低。总共 108 名患者被随机分为两组,分别接受侧切植入物器械(A 组)或前-后微创切口器械(B 组)的 TKA。所有 TKA 均采用微创、迷你股外侧肌入路进行手术。每一组中有 50%的 TKA 采用计算机辅助操作。在术前和术后 3 个月评估放射学参数、临床结果和膝关节评分。在 B 组中,我们发现肢体机械轴的准确性明显更高(范围 +/-3 度:A 组 54%,B 组 89%,p <0.001)、内侧胫骨近端角(范围 +/-3 度:A 组 85%,B 组 98%,p <0.027)和胫骨倾斜角(范围 +/-3 度:A 组 59%,B 组 85%,p <0.007)。导航系统的应用只能显著减少 B 组的离群值(准确性>3 度)。两组的临床结果和膝关节评分相似,不受计算机辅助的影响。与股四头肌保留的侧切器械相比,使用前-后、微创切口器械进行微创 TKA 将导致更高的植入物准确性。导航技术无法弥补侧切器械的缺陷。本研究的临床意义在于,由于不可接受的植入物准确性降低,股四头肌保留的侧切器械不应用于 TKA。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验