Literature DB >> 33429813

Which is the better choice? A clinical cohort study protocol evaluating the differences between standard medial parapatellar and minimally invasive approaches in total knee replacement.

Qiong Jia1, Xin Chen2, Jun Zhang3, Yang Hu3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is still a lack of consensus on the best approach for total knee replacement (TKR). We carried out this present retrospective cohort study to assess the overall safety and effectiveness of a minimally invasive approach without the use of computer navigation in comparison with conventional TKR.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who receiving the primary TKR in the same institution from 2014 to 2016 was conducted. The inclusion criteria for the study indicated that the patient required a unilateral or bilateral TKR was between 18 and 80 years' old, provided informed consent, was followed up for at least 2 years, and was in stable health. There was no treatment for any condition or condition that might pose a risk of excessive surgery. The same TKR standard rehabilitation program was provided to all patients. Data were collected on patient demographics, anesthesia style, American Society of Anesthesiology scores, tourniquet duration, and surgical drainage loss. Our primary outcome measure was discharge time. Secondary outcomes included duration of surgery, incidence of postoperative complications, imaging location 6 weeks after surgery, Oxford Knee Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, and knee ROM. Complications were recorded and classified as surgical site, thromboembolic, systemic, or requiring reoperation.
RESULTS: It was assumed that there is a remarkable difference in postoperative outcomes between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION: The limitations of our present research include the inherent limitations in any retrospective cohort research, including the observation bias and possibility of selection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry6349).
Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33429813      PMCID: PMC7793439          DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)        ISSN: 0025-7974            Impact factor:   1.817


  14 in total

Review 1.  Comparison of the minimally invasive and standard medial parapatellar approaches for total knee arthroplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Z Liu; H Yang
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.671

Review 2.  Comparison of minimally invasive approaches and standard median parapatellar approach for total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Li Zhang; Xian Li; Julian M Rüwald; Kristian Welle; Frank A Schildberg; Koroush Kabir
Journal:  Technol Health Care       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 1.285

3.  Sub-vastus approach is more effective than a medial parapatellar approach in primary total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Stephen A Bridgman; Gayle Walley; Gilbert MacKenzie; Darren Clement; David Griffiths; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2009-01-09       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Influence of minimally invasive surgery on implant positioning and the functional outcome for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Peter E Müller; Christoph Pellengahr; Matthias Witt; Jörn Kircher; Hans Jürgen Refior; Volkmar Jansson
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty; a pragmatic randomised controlled trial reporting outcomes up to 2 year follow up.

Authors:  Andrew Tasker; Mohammed Hassaballa; James Murray; Sarah Lancaster; Neil Artz; William Harries; Andrew Porteous
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 6.  Timing of rehabilitation on length of stay and cost in patients with hip or knee joint arthroplasty: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michael Masaracchio; William J Hanney; Xinliang Liu; Morey Kolber; Kaitlin Kirker
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Comparison of computer-assisted navigation and conventional instrumentation for bilateral total knee arthroplasty: The outcomes at mid-term follow-up.

Authors:  Robert Wen-Wei Hsu; Wei-Hsiu Hsu; Wun-Jer Shen; Wei-Bin Hsu; Shr-Hsin Chang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  Perioperative combined administration of tranexamic acid and dexamethasone in total knee arthroplasty-benefit versus harm?

Authors:  You Yu; Hai Lin; Zhitao Wu; Peng Xu; Zhengliang Lei
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.817

9.  Antibiotic-impregnated bone cement for preventing infection in patients receiving primary total hip and knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jin Zhang; Xiao-Yu Zhang; Feng-Li Jiang; Yi-Ping Wu; Bei-Bei Yang; Zi-Yun Liu; Dong Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 10.  Better outcomes after minimally invasive surgeries compared to the standard invasive medial parapatellar approach for total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Filippo Migliorini; Jörg Eschweiler; Alice Baroncini; Markus Tingart; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.