Suppr超能文献

机器人辅助内侧单髁膝关节置换术与基于夹具的单髁膝关节置换术联合导航控制的前瞻性随机对照研究方案。

Robotic-arm assisted medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty versus jig-based unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with navigation control: study protocol for a prospective randomised controlled trial.

机构信息

Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, Fitzrovia, London, NW1 2BU, UK.

出版信息

Trials. 2020 Aug 17;21(1):721. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04631-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There remains a paucity of clinical studies assessing how any differences in accuracy of implant positioning between robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RO UKA) and conventional jig-based unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CO UKA) translate to patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, and implant survivorship. The objectives of this study are to compare accuracy of implant positioning, limb alignment, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and complications in CO UKA versus RO UKA. Computer navigation will be used to assess intraoperative knee kinematics in all patients undergoing CO UKA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This prospective randomised controlled trial will include 140 patients with symptomatic medial compartment knee arthritis undergoing primary UKA. Following informed consent, patients will be randomised to CO UKA (control group) or RO UKA (investigation group) at a ratio of 1:1 using an online random number generator. The primary objective of this study is to compare accuracy of implant positioning in CO UKA versus RO UKA. The secondary objectives are to compare the following outcomes between the two treatment groups: limb alignment, surgical efficiency, postoperative functional rehabilitation, functional outcomes, quality of life, range of motion, resource use, cost effectivness, and complications. Observers will review patients at regular intervals for 2 years after surgery to record predefined study outcomes pertaining to these objectives. Ethical approval was obtained from the London-Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee, UK. The study is sponsored by University College London, UK.

DISCUSSION

This study compares a comprehensive and robust range of clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes in CO UKA versus RO UKA. The findings of this study will provide an improved understanding of the differences in CO UKA versus RO UKA with respect to accuracy of implant positioning, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04095637 . Registered on 19 September 2019.

摘要

背景

目前,评估机器人辅助单髁膝关节置换术(RO UKA)和传统基于夹具的单髁膝关节置换术(CO UKA)在植入物定位准确性方面的任何差异如何转化为患者满意度、功能结果和植入物存活率方面的临床研究仍然很少。本研究的目的是比较 CO UKA 与 RO UKA 在植入物定位准确性、肢体对线、患者满意度、功能结果、植入物存活率、成本效益和并发症方面的差异。所有接受 CO UKA 的患者都将使用计算机导航来评估术中膝关节运动学。

方法和分析

本前瞻性随机对照试验将纳入 140 例有症状的内侧间室膝关节关节炎行初次 UKA 的患者。在获得知情同意后,患者将按照 1:1 的比例随机分为 CO UKA(对照组)或 RO UKA(观察组),使用在线随机数生成器。本研究的主要目的是比较 CO UKA 与 RO UKA 植入物定位准确性。次要目标是比较两组治疗方法的以下结果:肢体对线、手术效率、术后功能康复、功能结果、生活质量、活动范围、资源利用、成本效益和并发症。观察者将在术后 2 年内定期对患者进行复查,以记录与这些目标相关的预先设定的研究结果。本研究已获得英国伦敦布卢姆斯伯里研究伦理委员会的伦理批准。该研究由英国伦敦大学学院赞助。

讨论

本研究比较了 CO UKA 与 RO UKA 在全面和稳健的临床、功能和影像学结果方面的差异。该研究的结果将更好地了解 CO UKA 与 RO UKA 在植入物定位准确性、患者满意度、功能结果、植入物存活率、成本效益和并发症方面的差异。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04095637. 于 2019 年 9 月 19 日注册。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e18/7430022/dc7b1154d08b/13063_2020_4631_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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