Suppr超能文献

与传统器械相比,使用手持式导航系统进行全膝关节置换术后的对线及早期临床结果。

Alignment and early clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty using a handheld navigation system compared to conventional instruments.

作者信息

Nishida Cameron, Shimoda Brent, Weldon Rosana H, Kaneshiro Jeanae M, Nakasone Cass K

机构信息

John A Burns School of Medicine, Honolulu, United States.

University of Hawai'i at Mānoa, Honolulu, United States.

出版信息

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2025 Sep 2;145(1):434. doi: 10.1007/s00402-025-05998-3.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Proper lower extremity alignment is important for success and longevity of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Conventional instrumentation has demonstrated higher rates of mechanical axis (MA) malalignment compared to robotic or computer navigated surgery. The purpose of this study is to compare the alignment and early clinical outcomes between a handheld implant agnostic navigation system and conventional instrumentation.

METHODS

117 patients who underwent single-stage bilateral TKA were prospectively studied. The distal femoral and proximal tibial resections were performed using a handheld navigation system (HHNS) on one knee and conventional instrumentation on the other knee. Implant positioning and lower extremity alignment were compared. Knee society knee score (KSKS), knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint replacement (KOOS JR), patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global physical health (GPH), and patient satisfaction were compared up to one year postoperatively.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences in the mean values between knees performed using HHNS compared to conventional instruments for MA (0.71° vs. - 0.32°, p = 0.0086), tibial slope (1.17° vs. 0.61°, p = 0.0165), and AP tibial component angle (0.52° vs 0.03°, p = 0.0149). No significant difference in AP femoral component position (5.65° vs. 5.60°, p = 0.87) was found. The HHNS resulted in a higher proportion of knees achieving targeted alignment for each measurement reviewed by 3-9%. Tourniquet time was approximately 6 min longer for the HHNS compared to conventional instruments (p < 0.0005). No significant difference was found for KSKS, KOOS JR, PROMIS GPH, and patient satisfaction at 1 year following surgery.

CONCLUSION

TKA performed with a HHNS did not result in any clinical or statistically meaningful differences regarding alignment or patient reported outcomes when compared to conventional instruments. However, a larger proportion of patients achieved surgical alignment targets for all measurements considered with use of the HHNS.

摘要

引言

正确的下肢对线对于全膝关节置换术(TKA)的成功及长期效果至关重要。与机器人辅助或计算机导航手术相比,传统器械的机械轴(MA)对线不良发生率更高。本研究旨在比较手持式无植入物导航系统与传统器械在对线及早期临床结果方面的差异。

方法

对117例行单阶段双侧TKA的患者进行前瞻性研究。一侧膝关节使用手持式导航系统(HHNS)进行股骨远端和胫骨近端截骨,另一侧膝关节使用传统器械。比较植入物位置及下肢对线情况。术后1年内比较膝关节协会膝关节评分(KSKS)、关节置换的膝关节损伤和骨关节炎转归评分(KOOS JR)、患者报告结局测量信息系统(PROMIS)全球身体健康(GPH)以及患者满意度。

结果

与使用传统器械的膝关节相比,使用HHNS的膝关节在MA(0.71°对 - 0.32°,p = 0.0086)、胫骨坡度(1.17°对0.61°,p = 0.0165)和胫骨组件前后位角度(0.52°对0.03°,p = 0.0149)的平均值上存在统计学显著差异。在股骨组件前后位位置上未发现显著差异(5.65°对5.60°,p = 0.87)。对于所评估的各项测量,HHNS使达到目标对线的膝关节比例提高了3%至9%。与传统器械相比,HHNS的止血带使用时间大约长6分钟(p < 0.0005)。术后1年,在KSKS、KOOS JR、PROMIS GPH和患者满意度方面未发现显著差异。

结论

与传统器械相比,使用HHNS进行TKA在对线或患者报告结局方面未产生任何临床或统计学上有意义的差异。然而,使用HHNS时,更大比例的患者在所有考虑的测量中达到了手术对线目标。

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