Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025
Mechanical versus kinematic alignment for total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Migliorini Filippo, Maffulli Nicola, Pilone Marco, Schäfer Luise, Ullmann David, Huber Thorsten, Rath Björn
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The present meta-analysis compared mechanical versus kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The outcomes of interest were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion (ROM), and revision rate.
METHODS: This study was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. In July 2024, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase were accessed without time constraints. All the clinical studies that compared mechanical versus kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty were accessed.
RESULTS: 30 studies (3133 TKAs) were collected. The mean duration of the follow-up was 30.8 ± 38 months. No difference was found in Knee KSS-F, Knee Society Score (KSS, P = 0.2) and its function subscale (P = 0.3), visual analogue scale (VAS, P = 0.3), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC, P = 0.2), Oxford Knee Score (OKS, P = 0.5). No difference was found in the rate of revision (P = 0.4). The ROM was slightly greater in the kinematic group (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: PROMs and revision did not show a difference between mechanical and kinematic alignment in TKA. However, a minimal difference in the ROM was evidenced, which probably does not have clinical relevance.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: This study was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. In July 2024, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase were accessed without time constraints. All the clinical studies that compared mechanical versus kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty were accessed.
RESULTS: 30 studies (3133 TKAs) were collected. The mean duration of the follow-up was 30.8 ± 38 months. No difference was found in Knee KSS-F, Knee Society Score (KSS, P = 0.2) and its function subscale (P = 0.3), visual analogue scale (VAS, P = 0.3), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC, P = 0.2), Oxford Knee Score (OKS, P = 0.5). No difference was found in the rate of revision (P = 0.4). The ROM was slightly greater in the kinematic group (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: PROMs and revision did not show a difference between mechanical and kinematic alignment in TKA. However, a minimal difference in the ROM was evidenced, which probably does not have clinical relevance.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review and meta-analysis.