降低机器人辅助全髋关节置换术的植入物废品率。

IF 2.8 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Tony S Shen, Ryan Cheng, Yu-Fen Chiu, Alexander S McLawhorn, Mark P Figgie, Geoffrey H Westrich
{"title":"降低机器人辅助全髋关节置换术的植入物废品率。","authors":"Tony S Shen, Ryan Cheng, Yu-Fen Chiu, Alexander S McLawhorn, Mark P Figgie, Geoffrey H Westrich","doi":"10.1302/2633-1462.58.BJO-2024-0061.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Implant waste during total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a significant cost to the USA healthcare system. While studies have explored methods to improve THA cost-effectiveness, the literature comparing the proportions of implant waste by intraoperative technology used during THA is limited. The aims of this study were to: 1) examine whether the use of enabling technologies during THA results in a smaller proportion of wasted implants compared to navigation-guided and conventional manual THA; 2) determine the proportion of wasted implants by implant type; and 3) examine the effects of surgeon experience on rates of implant waste by technology used.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified 104,420 implants either implanted or wasted during 18,329 primary THAs performed on 16,724 patients between January 2018 and June 2022 at our institution. THAs were separated by technology used: robotic-assisted (n = 4,171), imageless navigation (n = 6,887), and manual (n = 7,721). The primary outcome of interest was the rate of implant waste during primary THA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Robotic-assisted THA resulted in a lower proportion (1.5%) of implant waste compared to navigation-guided THA (2.0%) and manual THA (1.9%) (all p < 0.001). Both navigated and manual THA were more likely to waste acetabular shells (odds ratio (OR) 4.5 vs 3.1) and polyethylene liners (OR 2.2 vs 2.0) compared to robotic-assisted THA after adjusting for demographic and perioperative factors, such as surgeon experience (p < 0.001). While implant waste decreased with increasing experience for procedures performed manually (p < 0.001) or with navigation (p < 0.001), waste rates for robotic-assisted THA did not differ based on surgical experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robotic-assisted THAs wasted a smaller proportion of acetabular shells and polyethylene liners than navigation-guided and manual THAs. Individual implant waste rates vary depending on the type of technology used intraoperatively. Future studies on implant waste during THA should examine reasons for non-implantation in order to better understand and develop methods for cost-saving.</p>","PeriodicalId":34103,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Open","volume":"5 8","pages":"715-720"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11341180/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reduction in rate of implant waste associated with robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Tony S Shen, Ryan Cheng, Yu-Fen Chiu, Alexander S McLawhorn, Mark P Figgie, Geoffrey H Westrich\",\"doi\":\"10.1302/2633-1462.58.BJO-2024-0061.R1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Implant waste during total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a significant cost to the USA healthcare system. While studies have explored methods to improve THA cost-effectiveness, the literature comparing the proportions of implant waste by intraoperative technology used during THA is limited. The aims of this study were to: 1) examine whether the use of enabling technologies during THA results in a smaller proportion of wasted implants compared to navigation-guided and conventional manual THA; 2) determine the proportion of wasted implants by implant type; and 3) examine the effects of surgeon experience on rates of implant waste by technology used.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified 104,420 implants either implanted or wasted during 18,329 primary THAs performed on 16,724 patients between January 2018 and June 2022 at our institution. THAs were separated by technology used: robotic-assisted (n = 4,171), imageless navigation (n = 6,887), and manual (n = 7,721). The primary outcome of interest was the rate of implant waste during primary THA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Robotic-assisted THA resulted in a lower proportion (1.5%) of implant waste compared to navigation-guided THA (2.0%) and manual THA (1.9%) (all p < 0.001). Both navigated and manual THA were more likely to waste acetabular shells (odds ratio (OR) 4.5 vs 3.1) and polyethylene liners (OR 2.2 vs 2.0) compared to robotic-assisted THA after adjusting for demographic and perioperative factors, such as surgeon experience (p < 0.001). While implant waste decreased with increasing experience for procedures performed manually (p < 0.001) or with navigation (p < 0.001), waste rates for robotic-assisted THA did not differ based on surgical experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robotic-assisted THAs wasted a smaller proportion of acetabular shells and polyethylene liners than navigation-guided and manual THAs. Individual implant waste rates vary depending on the type of technology used intraoperatively. Future studies on implant waste during THA should examine reasons for non-implantation in order to better understand and develop methods for cost-saving.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone & Joint Open\",\"volume\":\"5 8\",\"pages\":\"715-720\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11341180/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone & Joint Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.58.BJO-2024-0061.R1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.58.BJO-2024-0061.R1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:全髋关节置换术(THA)中的植入物浪费是美国医疗系统的一大成本。虽然已有研究探讨了提高全髋关节置换术成本效益的方法,但根据全髋关节置换术中使用的术中技术来比较植入物浪费比例的文献却很有限。本研究的目的是1)研究与导航引导和传统手动 THA 相比,在 THA 过程中使用辅助技术是否会减少植入物的浪费比例;2)根据植入物类型确定浪费植入物的比例;3)根据所使用的技术研究外科医生经验对植入物浪费率的影响:我们确定了 2018 年 1 月至 2022 年 6 月期间我院为 16724 名患者实施的 18329 例初次 THAs 中植入或浪费的 104,420 个植入物。THAs 按照所使用的技术分类:机器人辅助(n = 4171)、无图像导航(n = 6887)和手动(n = 7721)。主要研究结果是初级THA期间的植入物浪费率:结果:与导航引导的 THA(2.0%)和手动 THA(1.9%)相比,机器人辅助 THA 造成的植入物浪费比例(1.5%)更低(均 p < 0.001)。在调整了人口统计学和围手术期因素(如外科医生经验)后,与机器人辅助 THA 相比,导航和手动 THA 更容易造成髋臼壳(几率比 (OR) 4.5 vs 3.1)和聚乙烯内衬(OR 2.2 vs 2.0)的浪费(P < 0.001)。手动手术(p < 0.001)或导航手术(p < 0.001)的植入物浪费随着经验的增加而减少,而机器人辅助THA的浪费率并不因手术经验而异:机器人辅助全髋关节置换术与导航引导和人工全髋关节置换术相比,髋臼壳和聚乙烯衬垫的浪费比例较小。个体植入物浪费率因术中使用的技术类型而异。未来有关 THA 过程中植入物浪费的研究应检查未植入的原因,以便更好地了解和开发节约成本的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reduction in rate of implant waste associated with robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty.

Aims: Implant waste during total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a significant cost to the USA healthcare system. While studies have explored methods to improve THA cost-effectiveness, the literature comparing the proportions of implant waste by intraoperative technology used during THA is limited. The aims of this study were to: 1) examine whether the use of enabling technologies during THA results in a smaller proportion of wasted implants compared to navigation-guided and conventional manual THA; 2) determine the proportion of wasted implants by implant type; and 3) examine the effects of surgeon experience on rates of implant waste by technology used.

Methods: We identified 104,420 implants either implanted or wasted during 18,329 primary THAs performed on 16,724 patients between January 2018 and June 2022 at our institution. THAs were separated by technology used: robotic-assisted (n = 4,171), imageless navigation (n = 6,887), and manual (n = 7,721). The primary outcome of interest was the rate of implant waste during primary THA.

Results: Robotic-assisted THA resulted in a lower proportion (1.5%) of implant waste compared to navigation-guided THA (2.0%) and manual THA (1.9%) (all p < 0.001). Both navigated and manual THA were more likely to waste acetabular shells (odds ratio (OR) 4.5 vs 3.1) and polyethylene liners (OR 2.2 vs 2.0) compared to robotic-assisted THA after adjusting for demographic and perioperative factors, such as surgeon experience (p < 0.001). While implant waste decreased with increasing experience for procedures performed manually (p < 0.001) or with navigation (p < 0.001), waste rates for robotic-assisted THA did not differ based on surgical experience.

Conclusion: Robotic-assisted THAs wasted a smaller proportion of acetabular shells and polyethylene liners than navigation-guided and manual THAs. Individual implant waste rates vary depending on the type of technology used intraoperatively. Future studies on implant waste during THA should examine reasons for non-implantation in order to better understand and develop methods for cost-saving.

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
Bone & Joint Open
Bone & Joint Open ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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