Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR · 2019
No definite advantage of a portable accelerometer-based navigation system over conventional technique in total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический 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.
Shigemura Tomonori, Murata Yasuaki, Yamamoto Yohei, Mizuki Norichika, Toki Yasunori, Wada Yuichi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Precise implant alignment is a crucial prognostic factor in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Portable navigation systems (PN-TKA) were reported to be better than the conventional technique (CON-TKA). We hypothesized that PN-TKA offered greater radiologic precision than CON-TKA in mechanically aligning components. We investigated whether (1) it improved global mechanical alignment, and (2) optimized component placement with respect to the tibial and femoral mechanical axes.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review compared PN-TKA versus CON-TKA. PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library search retrieved ten studies. Their data were pooled using RevMan 5.3. Odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous data were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed as I2 using a standard χ2 test. I2>50% denoted significant heterogeneity requiring a random effects model; otherwise, a fixed effects model was applied.
RESULTS: There were significantly fewer outliers for mechanical axis (I2=24%, OR=0.62, 95% CI=0.42-0.91, p=0.02) and coronal femoral component angle (I2=58%, OR=0.31, 95% CI=0.13-0.73, p=0.007) using PN-TKA; however, no significant difference was observed for coronal tibial component angle outliers (I2=0%, OR=0.66, 95% CI=0.38-1.15, p=0.14).
DISCUSSION: Although PN-TKA appeared to improve global alignment, it had no effect on coronal tibial alignment, which is a key factor in predicting the long-term success of component fixation. There thus appeared to be no definite advantage of PN-TKA over CON-TKA.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review compared PN-TKA versus CON-TKA. PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library search retrieved ten studies. Their data were pooled using RevMan 5.3. Odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous data were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed as I2 using a standard χ2 test. I2>50% denoted significant heterogeneity requiring a random effects model; otherwise, a fixed effects model was applied.
RESULTS: There were significantly fewer outliers for mechanical axis (I2=24%, OR=0.62, 95% CI=0.42-0.91, p=0.02) and coronal femoral component angle (I2=58%, OR=0.31, 95% CI=0.13-0.73, p=0.007) using PN-TKA; however, no significant difference was observed for coronal tibial component angle outliers (I2=0%, OR=0.66, 95% CI=0.38-1.15, p=0.14).
DISCUSSION: Although PN-TKA appeared to improve global alignment, it had no effect on coronal tibial alignment, which is a key factor in predicting the long-term success of component fixation. There thus appeared to be no definite advantage of PN-TKA over CON-TKA.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.