MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1055/s-0036-1584192

Медицинская библиотека · The journal of knee surgery · 2016

Outcome of Total Knee Replacement via Two Approaches in Indian Scenario.

Shukla Rajeev, Mahajan Pranav, Singh Manjeet, Jain Ravi Kant, Kumar Ravindra

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

This study was designed to assess the early and late clinical and functional outcome based on Knee Society Score in patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR) by medial parapatellar approach/midvastus approach. A total of 52 patients were included in the study of whom 28 patients were operated by medial parapatellar approach and 24 by midvastus approach. Patients were assessed on the basis of Knee Society Score, along with other parameters such as duration of hospital stay, blood loss during, and after surgery. The patients were followed up at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. The knee objective score showed significant better scores in midvastus group at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months, but the score in both the groups was not significant at 6 months and 1 year. The knee functional score showed significant better score in midvastus group at the end of 2 and 6 weeks. However, score in both the groups was not significant by the end of 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Patients' satisfaction and expectation scores were similar in both groups at all time intervals. The functional outcome of TKR surgery by midvastus approach was better in the first 3 months in comparison to medial parapatellar approach.

Для цитирования: Shukla Rajeev, Mahajan Pranav, Singh Manjeet, Jain Ravi Kant, Kumar Ravindra. Outcome of Total Knee Replacement via Two Approaches in Indian Scenario.. The journal of knee surgery. 2016. DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1584192.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.