Ortoklinik and Cankaya Orthopedics, Ankara, Turkey.
CortoClinics, Schijndel, The Netherlands.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022 Aug;30(8):2654-2665. doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06495-x. Epub 2021 Mar 1.
To determine whether patient-specific instrumentation (PSI), computer-assisted surgery (CAS) or robot-assisted surgery (RAS) enable more accurate rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) compared to conventional instrumentation, in terms of deviation from the planned target and the proportion of outliers from the target zone.
The authors independently conducted three structured electronic literature searches using the PubMed, Embase®, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 2007 to 2020. Studies were included if they compared rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate during TKA using conventional instrumentation versus PSI, CAS, and/or RAS, and reported deviation from preoperatively planned rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate in terms of absolute angles and/or number of outliers. Methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed by two researchers according to the Downs and Black Quality Checklist for Health Care Intervention Studies.
Fifteen studies, that reported on 2925 knees, were eligible for this systematic review, of which 6 studies used PSI, and 9 used CAS. No studies were found for RAS. Of the studies that reported on angular deviation from preoperatively planned rotational alignment, most found smaller deviations using PSI (0.5° to 1.4°) compared to conventional instrumentation (1.0° to 1.6°). All studies that reported on proportions of outliers from a target zone (± 3°), found lower rates of outliers using PSI (0 to 22%) compared to conventional instrumentation (5 to 96%). Most studies reported smaller angular deviation from preoperatively planned rotational alignment using CAS (0.1° to 6.9°) compared to conventional instrumentation (1.1° to 7.8°). Of the studies that reported on proportions of outliers from a target zone (± 3°), most found fewer outliers using CAS (10 to 61%) compared to conventional instrumentation (17 to 78%).
This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that both CAS and PSI can improve the accuracy of rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate by decreasing angular deviation from the preoperatively planned target and reducing the proportion of outliers from the target zone. The clinical relevance is that PSI and CAS can improve alignment, though the thresholds necessary to grant better outcomes and survival remain unclear.
IV.
在初次全膝关节置换术(TKA)中,比较患者特定仪器(PSI)、计算机辅助手术(CAS)和机器人辅助手术(RAS)与传统仪器相比,在从计划目标的偏差和目标区域外值的比例方面,是否能更精确地旋转胫骨基板。
作者于 2007 年至 2020 年,分别使用 PubMed、Embase®和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库,独立进行了三次有结构的电子文献检索。如果研究比较了使用传统仪器与 PSI、CAS 和/或 RAS 进行 TKA 时胫骨基板的旋转对准,并报告了胫骨基板的术前计划旋转对准的绝对角度和/或外值数量的偏差,则将其纳入研究。两名研究人员根据唐斯和布莱克健康护理干预研究质量清单,对合格研究的方法学质量进行了评估。
这项系统综述共纳入了 15 项研究,共 2925 例膝关节,其中 6 项研究使用 PSI,9 项研究使用 CAS。未发现 RAS 的研究。在报告从术前计划旋转对准的角度偏差的研究中,大多数研究发现 PSI (0.5°至 1.4°)的偏差小于传统仪器(1.0°至 1.6°)。所有报告目标区域(±3°)外值比例的研究发现,PSI (0 至 22%)的外值率低于传统仪器(5 至 96%)。大多数研究报告 CAS (0.1°至 6.9°)比传统仪器(1.1°至 7.8°)的从术前计划旋转对准的角度偏差更小。在报告目标区域(±3°)外值比例的研究中,大多数研究发现 CAS (10 至 61%)的外值率低于传统仪器(17 至 78%)。
这项系统综述和荟萃分析表明,CAS 和 PSI 都可以通过减少与术前计划目标的角度偏差和减少目标区域的外值比例来提高胫骨基板旋转对准的准确性。临床意义在于 PSI 和 CAS 可以改善对准,但仍不清楚获得更好结果和生存率所需的阈值。
IV 级。