与传统仪器相比,手持式导航系统在全膝关节置换术后的对齐和早期临床结果

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Cameron Nishida, Brent Shimoda, Rosana H Weldon, Jeanae M Kaneshiro, Cass K Nakasone
{"title":"与传统仪器相比,手持式导航系统在全膝关节置换术后的对齐和早期临床结果","authors":"Cameron Nishida,&nbsp;Brent Shimoda,&nbsp;Rosana H Weldon,&nbsp;Jeanae M Kaneshiro,&nbsp;Cass K Nakasone","doi":"10.1007/s00402-025-05998-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>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.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>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.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>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°, <i>p</i> = 0.0086), tibial slope (1.17° vs. 0.61°, <i>p</i> = 0.0165), and AP tibial component angle (0.52° vs 0.03°, <i>p</i> = 0.0149). No significant difference in AP femoral component position (5.65° vs. 5.60°, <i>p</i> = 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 (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.0005). No significant difference was found for KSKS, KOOS JR, PROMIS GPH, and patient satisfaction at 1 year following surgery.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>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.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":"145 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alignment and early clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty using a handheld navigation system compared to conventional instruments\",\"authors\":\"Cameron Nishida,&nbsp;Brent Shimoda,&nbsp;Rosana H Weldon,&nbsp;Jeanae M Kaneshiro,&nbsp;Cass K Nakasone\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00402-025-05998-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>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.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>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.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>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°, <i>p</i> = 0.0086), tibial slope (1.17° vs. 0.61°, <i>p</i> = 0.0165), and AP tibial component angle (0.52° vs 0.03°, <i>p</i> = 0.0149). No significant difference in AP femoral component position (5.65° vs. 5.60°, <i>p</i> = 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 (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.0005). No significant difference was found for KSKS, KOOS JR, PROMIS GPH, and patient satisfaction at 1 year following surgery.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>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.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery\",\"volume\":\"145 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00402-025-05998-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00402-025-05998-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

正确的下肢对齐对全膝关节置换术(TKA)的成功和寿命至关重要。与机器人或计算机导航手术相比,传统仪器显示出更高的机械轴(MA)错位率。本研究的目的是比较手持式种植体不可知论导航系统和传统仪器之间的对准和早期临床结果。方法对117例行单期双侧TKA的患者进行前瞻性研究。股骨远端和胫骨近端切除术在一个膝盖上使用手持导航系统(HHNS),在另一个膝盖上使用常规器械。比较种植体定位和下肢对准。膝关节社会评分(KSKS)、膝关节损伤和骨关节炎关节置换术结局评分(oos JR)、患者报告的结果测量信息系统(PROMIS)全球身体健康(GPH)和患者满意度在术后一年内进行比较。结果与常规器械相比,采用HHNS的膝关节在MA(0.71°vs - 0.32°,p = 0.0086)、胫骨斜率(1.17°vs 0.61°,p = 0.0165)和AP胫骨成分角(0.52°vs 0.03°,p = 0.0149)的平均值有统计学差异。AP股骨假体位置无显著差异(5.65°vs. 5.60°,p = 0.87)。HHNS导致更高比例的膝盖达到目标对齐的每一个测量审查3-9%。与传统仪器相比,HHNS的止血带时间大约长6分钟(p < 0.0005)。术后1年KSKS、KOOS JR、PROMIS GPH和患者满意度无显著差异。结论与传统器械相比,使用HHNS进行tka在对齐或患者报告的结果方面没有任何临床或统计学意义上的差异。然而,更大比例的患者在使用HHNS时达到了所有测量的手术对准目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

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

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

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

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.

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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
424
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance. "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信