比较双韧带稳定型和韧带保留型全膝关节置换术的疗效。

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-15 DOI:10.4055/cios22268
Lorena Hernandez, Ittai Shichman, Thomas H Christensen, Joshua C Rozell, Morteza Meftah, Ran Schwarzkopf
{"title":"比较双韧带稳定型和韧带保留型全膝关节置换术的疗效。","authors":"Lorena Hernandez, Ittai Shichman, Thomas H Christensen, Joshua C Rozell, Morteza Meftah, Ran Schwarzkopf","doi":"10.4055/cios22268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bicruciate-stabilized (BCS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to restore normal kinematics by replicating the function of both cruciate ligaments. Conventional cruciate-retaining (CR) design in TKA has shown previous clinical success with lower complication rates. This study compared the patient-reported outcomes between the BCS and CR TKA designs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study examined patients who underwent primary TKA using a CR or a BCS implant. Patient demographics, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR), and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) were compared between two cohorts. Patient-reported outcome measures were analyzed using independent samples <i>t</i>-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant preoperative demographic differences between groups. The CR cohort (n = 756) had significantly higher average KOOS, JR Scores compared to the BCS cohort (n = 652) at 3 months (59.7 ± 3.8 vs. 53.0 ± 3.9, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and 2 years (62.6 ± 8.0 vs. 53.8 ± 6.7, <i>p</i> = 0.001) after TKA. Within the cohort, KOOS, JR delta differences were not significant for CR when comparing patient scores 3 months to 1 year after surgery. Meanwhile, the BCS patients did show significant delta improvement (4.1 ± 1.9, <i>p</i> = 0.030) when compared 3 months to 1 year after surgery. One year postoperatively, the BCS cohort (n = 134) showed a significantly higher average FJS score (49.5 ± 31.4, vs. 36.8 ± 28.5, <i>p</i> = 0.028) than the CR cohort (n = 203). Both cohorts displayed a significant difference in delta improvements within their respective cohort when measuring FJS from 3 months to 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CR cohort performed better on average, compared to the BCS cohort in measures of KOOS, JR scores at the 2-year follow-up. The BCS cohort performed marginally better regarding FJS only at 1-year follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10825256/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Outcomes of Bicruciate-Stabilized and Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Lorena Hernandez, Ittai Shichman, Thomas H Christensen, Joshua C Rozell, Morteza Meftah, Ran Schwarzkopf\",\"doi\":\"10.4055/cios22268\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bicruciate-stabilized (BCS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to restore normal kinematics by replicating the function of both cruciate ligaments. Conventional cruciate-retaining (CR) design in TKA has shown previous clinical success with lower complication rates. This study compared the patient-reported outcomes between the BCS and CR TKA designs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study examined patients who underwent primary TKA using a CR or a BCS implant. Patient demographics, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR), and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) were compared between two cohorts. Patient-reported outcome measures were analyzed using independent samples <i>t</i>-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant preoperative demographic differences between groups. The CR cohort (n = 756) had significantly higher average KOOS, JR Scores compared to the BCS cohort (n = 652) at 3 months (59.7 ± 3.8 vs. 53.0 ± 3.9, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and 2 years (62.6 ± 8.0 vs. 53.8 ± 6.7, <i>p</i> = 0.001) after TKA. Within the cohort, KOOS, JR delta differences were not significant for CR when comparing patient scores 3 months to 1 year after surgery. Meanwhile, the BCS patients did show significant delta improvement (4.1 ± 1.9, <i>p</i> = 0.030) when compared 3 months to 1 year after surgery. One year postoperatively, the BCS cohort (n = 134) showed a significantly higher average FJS score (49.5 ± 31.4, vs. 36.8 ± 28.5, <i>p</i> = 0.028) than the CR cohort (n = 203). Both cohorts displayed a significant difference in delta improvements within their respective cohort when measuring FJS from 3 months to 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CR cohort performed better on average, compared to the BCS cohort in measures of KOOS, JR scores at the 2-year follow-up. The BCS cohort performed marginally better regarding FJS only at 1-year follow-up.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10825256/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4055/cios22268\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4055/cios22268","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:双十字韧带稳定型(BCS)全膝关节置换术(TKA)旨在通过复制双十字韧带的功能来恢复正常的运动学特性。传统的十字韧带固定(CR)设计在 TKA 中取得了临床成功,并发症发生率较低。本研究比较了 BCS 和 CR TKA 设计的患者报告结果:这项回顾性研究对使用 CR 或 BCS 植入物进行初级 TKA 手术的患者进行了检查。比较了两组患者的人口统计学特征、关节置换膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分(KOOS,JR)和遗忘关节评分(FJS)。患者报告的结果采用独立样本 t 检验进行分析:结果:两组患者术前在人口统计学方面无明显差异。在TKA术后3个月(59.7 ± 3.8 vs. 53.0 ± 3.9,p < 0.001)和2年(62.6 ± 8.0 vs. 53.8 ± 6.7,p = 0.001),CR队列(n = 756)的平均KOOS、JR评分明显高于BCS队列(n = 652)。在队列、KOOS、JR delta 中,比较术后 3 个月至 1 年的患者评分,CR 的差异并不显著。与此同时,BCS患者在术后3个月至1年的评分比较中确实显示出显著的delta改善(4.1 ± 1.9,p = 0.030)。术后一年,BCS队列(n = 134)的平均FJS评分(49.5 ± 31.4,vs 36.8 ± 28.5,p = 0.028)明显高于CR队列(n = 203)。在测量术后3个月至1年、2年和3年的FJS时,两个队列在各自队列中的Delta改善程度均有显著差异:结论:与BCS队列相比,CR队列在2年随访的KOOS和JR评分方面平均表现更好。BCS队列仅在术后1年的随访中在FJS方面略胜一筹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing Outcomes of Bicruciate-Stabilized and Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Background: Bicruciate-stabilized (BCS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to restore normal kinematics by replicating the function of both cruciate ligaments. Conventional cruciate-retaining (CR) design in TKA has shown previous clinical success with lower complication rates. This study compared the patient-reported outcomes between the BCS and CR TKA designs.

Methods: This retrospective study examined patients who underwent primary TKA using a CR or a BCS implant. Patient demographics, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR), and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) were compared between two cohorts. Patient-reported outcome measures were analyzed using independent samples t-tests.

Results: There were no significant preoperative demographic differences between groups. The CR cohort (n = 756) had significantly higher average KOOS, JR Scores compared to the BCS cohort (n = 652) at 3 months (59.7 ± 3.8 vs. 53.0 ± 3.9, p < 0.001) and 2 years (62.6 ± 8.0 vs. 53.8 ± 6.7, p = 0.001) after TKA. Within the cohort, KOOS, JR delta differences were not significant for CR when comparing patient scores 3 months to 1 year after surgery. Meanwhile, the BCS patients did show significant delta improvement (4.1 ± 1.9, p = 0.030) when compared 3 months to 1 year after surgery. One year postoperatively, the BCS cohort (n = 134) showed a significantly higher average FJS score (49.5 ± 31.4, vs. 36.8 ± 28.5, p = 0.028) than the CR cohort (n = 203). Both cohorts displayed a significant difference in delta improvements within their respective cohort when measuring FJS from 3 months to 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after surgery.

Conclusions: The CR cohort performed better on average, compared to the BCS cohort in measures of KOOS, JR scores at the 2-year follow-up. The BCS cohort performed marginally better regarding FJS only at 1-year follow-up.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信