目的:本研究的主要目的是比较传统的基于夹具的全膝关节置换术(Conv-TKA)与机器人辅助的TKA(RA-TKA)术后短期患者报告的结果测量(PROM)和股骨和胫骨之间的旋转不匹配。
方法:本回顾性研究,连续的病例对照试验纳入了83例膝关节内翻骨关节炎患者,这些患者接受Conv-TKA和RA-TKA,使用双交叉稳定型TKA.使用3DCT测量比较两组之间的股骨和胫骨组件的旋转失配。PROMs(2011年膝关节社会评分(KSS),被遗忘的联合评分-12(FJS-12),比较术后1至2年患者的髌骨评分。
结果:两组在以下任何术前因素上都没有显着差异:手术年龄,体重指数(BMI),术前活动范围(ROM),髋-膝-踝(HKA)角。术后HKA角度和胫骨旋转角度无显著差异,与Conv-TKA组相比,RA-TKA组股骨旋转角和旋转不匹配的绝对值均显著较小(均P<0.01)。都不是术后PROM(2011KSS:疼痛,患者满意度,患者期望,高级活动评分)和髌骨评分在组间有显著差异,但Conv-TKA组FJS-12明显优于RA-TKA组(p<0.01)。
结论:与Conv-TKA相比,RA-TKA并未改善FJS-12,但确实导致股骨组件更准确的旋转对齐以及股骨和胫骨组件之间的旋转不匹配。
方法:IV.
OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to compare postoperative short-term patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs) and rotational mismatch between femoral and tibial following conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty (Conv-TKA) versus robotic-assisted TKA (RA-TKA) using three-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) measurements.
METHODS: This retrospective, consecutive case-control trial included 83 patients with varus osteoarthritis of the knee undergoing Conv-TKA versus RA-TKA using bi-cruciate stabilized TKA. The rotational mismatch of the femoral and tibial components between the two groups were compared using 3DCT measurements. PROMs (2011 Knee Society Score (KSS), forgotten joint score-12 (FJS-12), patella score were compared in patients between 1 and 2 years postoperatively.
RESULTS: The two groups did not exhibit significant differences in any of the following preoperative factors: age at surgery, body mass index (BMI), preoperative range of motion (ROM), hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle. There were no significant differences in postoperative HKA angle and tibial rotation angle, the absolute values of the femoral rotational angle and rotational mismatch were significantly smaller in the RA-TKA group than in the Conv-TKA group (both p < 0.01). Neither Postoperative PROMs (2011 KSS: pain, patient satisfaction, patient expectation, advanced activities score) nor patella score differed significantly between the groups, but FJS-12 was significantly better in the Conv-TKA group than in the RA-TKA group (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: RA-TKA did not improve FJS-12 compared to Conv-TKA, but did result in more accurate rotational alignment of femoral component and rotational mismatch between the femoral and tibial components.
METHODS: IV.