全膝关节置换术中间隙平衡技术与测量截骨技术的临床及影像学结果
Clinical and Radiographic Outcome of Gap Balancing Versus Measured Resection Techniques in Total Knee Arthroplasty.
作者信息
De Wachter Eva, Vanlauwe Johan, Krause Robert, Bayer-Helms Hans, Ganzer Dirk, Scheerlinck Thierry
机构信息
Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, UZ Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Oberlinklinik, Potsdam, Germany.
出版信息
Arthroplast Today. 2020 Oct 5;6(4):835-844. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2020.07.046. eCollection 2020 Dec.
BACKGROUND
There is no consensus regarding superiority between gap balancing (GB) and measured resection (MR) techniques to implant total knee arthroplasties. In a multicenter setup, we compared both techniques using the same prosthesis.
METHODS
We included 262 balanSys posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasties from 4 centers: 3 using the MR (n = 162) and one using the GB technique (n = 100), without navigation.
RESULTS
There was no significant difference in the Knee Society Score or visual analog scale pain at 2- and 7-year follow-up. The visual analog scale for satisfaction was significantly better in the MR group at 2 but not at 7 years. We found a significantly higher average valgus in the GB group, but the overall alignment was within 2° of neutral on the full-leg radiographs. There were no significant differences concerning radiolucency and survival.
CONCLUSIONS
We found no significant differences in the functional outcome, pain, alignment, or survival, but a tendency toward better function using MR and better survival with GB.
背景
在全膝关节置换术中，间隙平衡（GB）技术和测量截骨（MR）技术哪种更具优势尚无定论。在多中心研究中，我们使用相同的假体对这两种技术进行了比较。
方法
我们纳入了来自4个中心的262例balanSys后稳定型全膝关节置换术：3个中心采用MR技术（n = 162），1个中心采用GB技术（n = 100），均未使用导航。
结果
在2年和7年随访时，膝关节协会评分或视觉模拟评分疼痛方面无显著差异。在2年时，MR组的视觉模拟满意度评分显著更高，但7年时并非如此。我们发现GB组平均外翻角度显著更高，但全腿X线片上的整体对线在中立位2°以内。在透亮区和生存率方面无显著差异。
结论
我们发现功能结果、疼痛、对线或生存率方面无显著差异，但使用MR技术有功能更好的趋势，使用GB技术有生存率更高的趋势。
Zotero 插件