Cargando…

Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study

BACKGROUND: The use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has increased and new technologies have been developed to improve patient survival and satisfaction, soft tissue balance, alignment, and component size. Robot-assisted systems offer an increase in surgical precision and accuracy. The pu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Negrín, Roberto, Duboy, Jaime, Iñiguez, Magaly, Reyes, Nicolás O., Barahona, Maximiliano, Ferrer, Gonzalo, Infante, Carlos, Jabes, Nicolás
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7879692/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33579393
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2
_version_ 1783650564194697216
author Negrín, Roberto
Duboy, Jaime
Iñiguez, Magaly
Reyes, Nicolás O.
Barahona, Maximiliano
Ferrer, Gonzalo
Infante, Carlos
Jabes, Nicolás
author_facet Negrín, Roberto
Duboy, Jaime
Iñiguez, Magaly
Reyes, Nicolás O.
Barahona, Maximiliano
Ferrer, Gonzalo
Infante, Carlos
Jabes, Nicolás
author_sort Negrín, Roberto
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has increased and new technologies have been developed to improve patient survival and satisfaction, soft tissue balance, alignment, and component size. Robot-assisted systems offer an increase in surgical precision and accuracy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the precision of component position using five radiological parameters in conventional and robotic-assisted medial UKA using the NAVIO system. METHODS: A cohort study was designed for patients who underwent medial UKA between April 2017 and March 2019 in a single center. Patients were allocated in the conventional (UKA-C) or robotic-assisted (UKA-R) group. The variables analyzed were age, gender, affected knee side, length of hospital stay, surgical time, and radiological measurements such as anatomical medial distal femoral angle (aMDFA), anatomical medial proximal tibial angle (aMPTA), tibial slope, the sagittal femoral angle, and the component size. A target was defined for each measurement, and a successful UKA was defined if at least four radiological measures were on target after surgery. Also, patients’ reported outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and a numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were included, 18 of them underwent UKA-R. The success rate for UKA in the UKA-R group was 87%; meanwhile, in the UKA-C group this was 28%, this difference was significant and powered (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.001; 1 − β = 0.95). Also, a 5-point difference in favor of the UKA-R group in the median OKS (p = 0.01), and a significantly lower median NRS for pain (p < 0.000) were found after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: UKA-R achieved more precision in the radiological parameters’ measure in this study. Also, UKA-R has a trend towards a better OKS and a lower NRS for pain at short-term follow-up.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7879692
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78796922021-02-19 Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study Negrín, Roberto Duboy, Jaime Iñiguez, Magaly Reyes, Nicolás O. Barahona, Maximiliano Ferrer, Gonzalo Infante, Carlos Jabes, Nicolás Knee Surg Relat Res Research Article BACKGROUND: The use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has increased and new technologies have been developed to improve patient survival and satisfaction, soft tissue balance, alignment, and component size. Robot-assisted systems offer an increase in surgical precision and accuracy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the precision of component position using five radiological parameters in conventional and robotic-assisted medial UKA using the NAVIO system. METHODS: A cohort study was designed for patients who underwent medial UKA between April 2017 and March 2019 in a single center. Patients were allocated in the conventional (UKA-C) or robotic-assisted (UKA-R) group. The variables analyzed were age, gender, affected knee side, length of hospital stay, surgical time, and radiological measurements such as anatomical medial distal femoral angle (aMDFA), anatomical medial proximal tibial angle (aMPTA), tibial slope, the sagittal femoral angle, and the component size. A target was defined for each measurement, and a successful UKA was defined if at least four radiological measures were on target after surgery. Also, patients’ reported outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and a numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were included, 18 of them underwent UKA-R. The success rate for UKA in the UKA-R group was 87%; meanwhile, in the UKA-C group this was 28%, this difference was significant and powered (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.001; 1 − β = 0.95). Also, a 5-point difference in favor of the UKA-R group in the median OKS (p = 0.01), and a significantly lower median NRS for pain (p < 0.000) were found after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: UKA-R achieved more precision in the radiological parameters’ measure in this study. Also, UKA-R has a trend towards a better OKS and a lower NRS for pain at short-term follow-up. BioMed Central 2021-02-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7879692/ /pubmed/33579393 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Negrín, Roberto
Duboy, Jaime
Iñiguez, Magaly
Reyes, Nicolás O.
Barahona, Maximiliano
Ferrer, Gonzalo
Infante, Carlos
Jabes, Nicolás
Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study
title Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study
title_full Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study
title_fullStr Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study
title_full_unstemmed Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study
title_short Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study
title_sort robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7879692/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33579393
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00087-2
work_keys_str_mv AT negrinroberto roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy
AT duboyjaime roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy
AT iniguezmagaly roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy
AT reyesnicolaso roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy
AT barahonamaximiliano roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy
AT ferrergonzalo roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy
AT infantecarlos roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy
AT jabesnicolas roboticassistedvsconventionalsurgeryinmedialunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyaclinicalandradiologicalstudy