Cargando…
Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants
Background and Objectives: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the most effective treatment method for end-stage osteoarthritis. One of the most important aspects of this surgery is adequate implant positioning, as it guarantees the desired outcome of restoring limb biomechanics. Surgical technique is...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10223160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37241112 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina59050880 |
_version_ | 1785049874852478976 |
---|---|
author | Maciąg, Bartosz M. Kordyaczny, Tomasz Maciąg, Grzegorz J. Łapiński, Marcin Jegierski, Dawid Świderek, Jakub Tsitko, Hanna Dorocińska, Monika Żarnovsky, Krystian Świercz, Maciej Stępiński, Piotr Adamska, Olga Stolarczyk, Artur |
author_facet | Maciąg, Bartosz M. Kordyaczny, Tomasz Maciąg, Grzegorz J. Łapiński, Marcin Jegierski, Dawid Świderek, Jakub Tsitko, Hanna Dorocińska, Monika Żarnovsky, Krystian Świercz, Maciej Stępiński, Piotr Adamska, Olga Stolarczyk, Artur |
author_sort | Maciąg, Bartosz M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and Objectives: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the most effective treatment method for end-stage osteoarthritis. One of the most important aspects of this surgery is adequate implant positioning, as it guarantees the desired outcome of restoring limb biomechanics. Surgical technique is being continuously improved along with hardware development. There are two novel devices designed to help establish proper femoral component rotation: soft-tissue tensor and robotic–assisted TKA (RATKA). This study compared the femoral component rotation achieved with the use of three methods: RATKA, soft tissue tensioner and the conventional measured-resection technique, all of them utilizing anatomical design prosthesis components. Materials and Methods: A total of 139 patients diagnosed with end-stage osteoarthritis underwent total knee arthroplasty between December 2020 and June 2021. After the surgery, they were divided into three groups depending on procedure technique and implant type: Persona (Zimmer Biomet) + Fuzion Balancer, RATKA + Journey II BCS or conventional TKA + Persona/Journey. Postoperatively, a computed tomography examination was performed in order to measure femoral component rotation. All three groups were compared independently during statistical analysis. Fisher’s exact, Kruskal–Wallis and Dwass–Steel–Crichtlow–Fligner tests were used for particular calculations. Results: Statistically significant differences in femoral component rotation between groups were noticed. However, in terms of values other than 0° in external rotation, no significant variance was revealed. Conclusions: Additional total knee arthroplasty instruments seem to improve the outcomes of the surgery, providing better component positioning than in the conventional measured-resection technique based only on bone landmarks. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10223160 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102231602023-05-28 Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants Maciąg, Bartosz M. Kordyaczny, Tomasz Maciąg, Grzegorz J. Łapiński, Marcin Jegierski, Dawid Świderek, Jakub Tsitko, Hanna Dorocińska, Monika Żarnovsky, Krystian Świercz, Maciej Stępiński, Piotr Adamska, Olga Stolarczyk, Artur Medicina (Kaunas) Article Background and Objectives: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the most effective treatment method for end-stage osteoarthritis. One of the most important aspects of this surgery is adequate implant positioning, as it guarantees the desired outcome of restoring limb biomechanics. Surgical technique is being continuously improved along with hardware development. There are two novel devices designed to help establish proper femoral component rotation: soft-tissue tensor and robotic–assisted TKA (RATKA). This study compared the femoral component rotation achieved with the use of three methods: RATKA, soft tissue tensioner and the conventional measured-resection technique, all of them utilizing anatomical design prosthesis components. Materials and Methods: A total of 139 patients diagnosed with end-stage osteoarthritis underwent total knee arthroplasty between December 2020 and June 2021. After the surgery, they were divided into three groups depending on procedure technique and implant type: Persona (Zimmer Biomet) + Fuzion Balancer, RATKA + Journey II BCS or conventional TKA + Persona/Journey. Postoperatively, a computed tomography examination was performed in order to measure femoral component rotation. All three groups were compared independently during statistical analysis. Fisher’s exact, Kruskal–Wallis and Dwass–Steel–Crichtlow–Fligner tests were used for particular calculations. Results: Statistically significant differences in femoral component rotation between groups were noticed. However, in terms of values other than 0° in external rotation, no significant variance was revealed. Conclusions: Additional total knee arthroplasty instruments seem to improve the outcomes of the surgery, providing better component positioning than in the conventional measured-resection technique based only on bone landmarks. MDPI 2023-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10223160/ /pubmed/37241112 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina59050880 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Maciąg, Bartosz M. Kordyaczny, Tomasz Maciąg, Grzegorz J. Łapiński, Marcin Jegierski, Dawid Świderek, Jakub Tsitko, Hanna Dorocińska, Monika Żarnovsky, Krystian Świercz, Maciej Stępiński, Piotr Adamska, Olga Stolarczyk, Artur Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants |
title | Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants |
title_full | Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants |
title_short | Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants |
title_sort | comparison of femoral component rotation between robotic-assisted vs. soft-tissue tensor total knee arthroplasty with anatomic implants |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10223160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37241112 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina59050880 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT maciagbartoszm comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT kordyacznytomasz comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT maciaggrzegorzj comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT łapinskimarcin comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT jegierskidawid comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT swiderekjakub comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT tsitkohanna comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT dorocinskamonika comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT zarnovskykrystian comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT swierczmaciej comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT stepinskipiotr comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT adamskaolga comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants AT stolarczykartur comparisonoffemoralcomponentrotationbetweenroboticassistedvssofttissuetensortotalkneearthroplastywithanatomicimplants |