Author:
Yamamoto Ayakane,Kaneko Takao,Takada Kazutaka,Yoshizawa Shu
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
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.
Level of evidence
IV.
Subject
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Reference43 articles.
1. Australian Orthopaedic Association (2017) Hip, knee & shoulder arthroplasty: annual report 2017. Natl Jt Replace Regist S48-S50. https://aoanjrr.sahmri.com/documents/10180/397736/Hip%2CKnee%26ShoulderArthroplasty. Accessed 11 Oct 2018.
2. Harris AI, Christen B, Malcorps JJ, O’Grady CP, Kopjar B, Sensiba PR, Vandenneucker H, Huang BK, Cates HE, Hur J, Marra DA (2019) Midterm performance of a guided-motion Bicruciate-stabilized total knee system: results from the international study of over 2000 consecutive primary total knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 34(7S):S201–S208
3. National Joint Registry (2017) 14th annual report - national joint registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. vol 1821. http://www.njrreports.org.uk/Portals/0/PDFdownloads/NJR14thAnnualReport.pdf. Accessed 11 Oct 2018.
4. Siddigi A, Levine BR, Springer BD (2022) Highlights of the 2021 American joint replacement registry annual report. Arthroplast Today 13:205–207
5. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD (2009) Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:57–63
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献