Jean Shanaa, Shaheryar Asad, William Mitchell, Malik Oda, Akash Pathak, Scott Marwin
{"title":"与机械髋关节置换术相比,计算机辅助髋关节置换术增加了手术时间但提高了准确性:一项最新的系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Jean Shanaa, Shaheryar Asad, William Mitchell, Malik Oda, Akash Pathak, Scott Marwin","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is considered a highly complex procedure, requiring advanced specialization and training beyond that of conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA). With the advent of computer-assisted navigation in HRA, some surgeons have adopted this technology to improve accuracy, whereas others continue to rely on traditional mechanical jig techniques. This study aims to assess radiographic positioning data and clinical outcomes to evaluate the effectiveness of computer-assisted navigation in HRA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases with specific search terms related to HRA, computer navigation, and outcomes. Data extraction focused on demographic and study variables such as complication rates, radiographic data, and patient-reported outcomes. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to compare operative time, odds of complications, and odds of outliers between patients undergoing HRA with and without the use of computer-assisted navigation. Statistical significance was defined as a 95% confidence interval that does not include one.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From an initial pool of 223 articles, 13 met inclusion criteria, encompassing 1,287 patients. Analysis revealed a complication rate of 5.29% for the mechanical group vs. 3.35% for the navigation group. Outlier rates were 31.96% for the mechanical group and 8.76% for the computer-assisted group. The average operative time was 110.95 minutes for procedures using navigation compared with 101.16 minutes for traditional HRA. Meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in overall complications. However, the navigation-based HRA cohort demonstrated a significantly lower likelihood of prosthetic placement outliers and a longer operative time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As reported over a decade ago by Liu et al., the use of navigation continues to result in a more accurate prosthetic positioning. Unfortunately, no significant difference was found in clinical outcomes. Future research is needed to demonstrate that the increased accuracy offered by navigation translates into superior postoperative outcomes. Such evidence could advocate for a complete transition from mechanical techniques to computer-assisted navigation as the standard approach for HRA.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, systematic review of Level II and III studies. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":47098,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Reviews","volume":"13 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Increased Operative Time yet Enhanced Accuracy in Computer-Assisted vs. Mechanical Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jean Shanaa, Shaheryar Asad, William Mitchell, Malik Oda, Akash Pathak, Scott Marwin\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is considered a highly complex procedure, requiring advanced specialization and training beyond that of conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA). With the advent of computer-assisted navigation in HRA, some surgeons have adopted this technology to improve accuracy, whereas others continue to rely on traditional mechanical jig techniques. This study aims to assess radiographic positioning data and clinical outcomes to evaluate the effectiveness of computer-assisted navigation in HRA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases with specific search terms related to HRA, computer navigation, and outcomes. Data extraction focused on demographic and study variables such as complication rates, radiographic data, and patient-reported outcomes. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to compare operative time, odds of complications, and odds of outliers between patients undergoing HRA with and without the use of computer-assisted navigation. Statistical significance was defined as a 95% confidence interval that does not include one.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From an initial pool of 223 articles, 13 met inclusion criteria, encompassing 1,287 patients. Analysis revealed a complication rate of 5.29% for the mechanical group vs. 3.35% for the navigation group. Outlier rates were 31.96% for the mechanical group and 8.76% for the computer-assisted group. The average operative time was 110.95 minutes for procedures using navigation compared with 101.16 minutes for traditional HRA. Meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in overall complications. However, the navigation-based HRA cohort demonstrated a significantly lower likelihood of prosthetic placement outliers and a longer operative time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As reported over a decade ago by Liu et al., the use of navigation continues to result in a more accurate prosthetic positioning. Unfortunately, no significant difference was found in clinical outcomes. Future research is needed to demonstrate that the increased accuracy offered by navigation translates into superior postoperative outcomes. Such evidence could advocate for a complete transition from mechanical techniques to computer-assisted navigation as the standard approach for HRA.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, systematic review of Level II and III studies. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47098,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JBJS Reviews\",\"volume\":\"13 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JBJS Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00202\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Increased Operative Time yet Enhanced Accuracy in Computer-Assisted vs. Mechanical Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Background: Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is considered a highly complex procedure, requiring advanced specialization and training beyond that of conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA). With the advent of computer-assisted navigation in HRA, some surgeons have adopted this technology to improve accuracy, whereas others continue to rely on traditional mechanical jig techniques. This study aims to assess radiographic positioning data and clinical outcomes to evaluate the effectiveness of computer-assisted navigation in HRA.
Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases with specific search terms related to HRA, computer navigation, and outcomes. Data extraction focused on demographic and study variables such as complication rates, radiographic data, and patient-reported outcomes. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to compare operative time, odds of complications, and odds of outliers between patients undergoing HRA with and without the use of computer-assisted navigation. Statistical significance was defined as a 95% confidence interval that does not include one.
Results: From an initial pool of 223 articles, 13 met inclusion criteria, encompassing 1,287 patients. Analysis revealed a complication rate of 5.29% for the mechanical group vs. 3.35% for the navigation group. Outlier rates were 31.96% for the mechanical group and 8.76% for the computer-assisted group. The average operative time was 110.95 minutes for procedures using navigation compared with 101.16 minutes for traditional HRA. Meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in overall complications. However, the navigation-based HRA cohort demonstrated a significantly lower likelihood of prosthetic placement outliers and a longer operative time.
Conclusion: As reported over a decade ago by Liu et al., the use of navigation continues to result in a more accurate prosthetic positioning. Unfortunately, no significant difference was found in clinical outcomes. Future research is needed to demonstrate that the increased accuracy offered by navigation translates into superior postoperative outcomes. Such evidence could advocate for a complete transition from mechanical techniques to computer-assisted navigation as the standard approach for HRA.
Level of evidence: Level III, systematic review of Level II and III studies. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
期刊介绍:
JBJS Reviews is an innovative review journal from the publishers of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. This continuously published online journal provides comprehensive, objective, and authoritative review articles written by recognized experts in the field. Edited by Thomas A. Einhorn, MD, and a distinguished Editorial Board, each issue of JBJS Reviews, updates the orthopaedic community on important topics in a concise, time-saving manner, providing expert insights into orthopaedic research and clinical experience. Comprehensive reviews, special features, and integrated CME provide orthopaedic surgeons with valuable perspectives on surgical practice and the latest advances in the field within twelve subspecialty areas: Basic Science, Education & Training, Elbow, Ethics, Foot & Ankle, Hand & Wrist, Hip, Infection, Knee, Oncology, Pediatrics, Pain Management, Rehabilitation, Shoulder, Spine, Sports Medicine, Trauma.