Literature DB >> 35690965

Gap balanced adjusted mechanical alignment versus measured resection mechanical alignment: a randomised controlled trial.

Hugh Waterson1, Robert Walker2, Petra Koopmans3, Rowenna Stroud2, Jonathan Phillips2, Vipul Mandalia2, Keith Eyres2, Andrew Toms2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Alignment goals in total knee replacement (TKR) is a topical subject. This study compares the short-term functional outcomes and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) of two philosophies for knee arthroplasty alignment: measured resection (MR) and an individualised alignment philosophy, with the tibia mechanically aligned and an instrumented gap balancer (GB) to align the femur in both flexion and extension. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 94 knees were enrolled in this randomised controlled trial. The surgical protocol used a MR technique for mechanical alignment or a GB technique for individualised alignment. Primary outcome was quadriceps strength. Secondary outcomes included validated functional tests and PROMs as well as patient satisfaction. Outcomes were assessed pre-operatively, at 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months post-operatively.
RESULTS: At 12-month follow-up, there was no significant difference in the change from baseline mean quadriceps peak torque between the two groups (p = 0.988). Significant improvement in the change in range of motion (ROM) in the GB group compared to the MR group at 3 months (13° vs 6° p = 0.028) but this improvement was not significant at 1 year (20° vs 17° p = 0.21). The functional test of balance showed statistically significant improvement at 6 weeks (p = 0.03) in the GB group but this difference was not maintained. PROMs favoured the GB group, with the KOOS pain scoring statistically better (p ≤ 0.05) at 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Individualised alignment philosophy utilising a GB technique did not demonstrate an improvement in the primary outcome measure quadriceps peak torque. Improvement was seen in the GB group in PROM pain scores that was significant, both statistically and clinically, out to at least 1 year. Gains that were seen in functional assessment with GB, although significant at some time points, were no longer significant at 1 year and no difference was seen in quads strength. Compared to a MR technique, the individualised GB technique appears to confer some improvement in pain, ROM and some functional tests following TKR in the short-term.
© 2022. Crown.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alignment; Functional assessment; Gap balancing; Individualised alignment; Knee outcomes; Ligament balancing; Measured resection; Mechanical alignment; TKR

Year:  2022        PMID: 35690965     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-022-04487-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  14 in total

1.  Imageless computer assisted versus conventional total knee replacement. A Bayesian meta-analysis of 23 comparative studies.

Authors:  Yaron S Brin; Vassilios S Nikolaou; Lawrence Joseph; David J Zukor; John Antoniou
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Timed up and down stairs test: preliminary reliability and validity of a new measure of functional mobility.

Authors:  Christopher A Zaino; Victoria Gocha Marchese; Sarah L Westcott
Journal:  Pediatr Phys Ther       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.049

3.  Validity and reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for assessment of standing balance.

Authors:  Ross A Clark; Adam L Bryant; Yonghao Pua; Paul McCrory; Kim Bennell; Michael Hunt
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2009-12-11       Impact factor: 2.840

4.  Differences in component and limb alignment between computer-assisted and conventional surgery total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Tsan-Wen Huang; Kuo-Ti Peng; Kuo-Chin Huang; Mel S Lee; Robert Wen-Wei Hsu
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Surgical Techniques for Total Knee Arthroplasty: Measured Resection, Gap Balancing, and Hybrid.

Authors:  Neil P Sheth; Adeel Husain; Charles Lenwood Nelson
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 3.020

6.  Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure.

Authors:  E M Roos; H P Roos; L S Lohmander; C Ekdahl; B D Beynnon
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.751

7.  Slight undercorrection following total knee arthroplasty results in superior clinical outcomes in varus knees.

Authors:  Luc Vanlommel; Jan Vanlommel; Steven Claes; Johan Bellemans
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  The Chitranjan S. Ranawat Award : No Difference in 2-year Functional Outcomes Using Kinematic versus Mechanical Alignment in TKA: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Simon W Young; Matthew L Walker; Ali Bayan; Toby Briant-Evans; Paul Pavlou; Bill Farrington
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Outcome of kinematic alignment using patient-specific instrumentation versus mechanical alignment in TKA: a meta-analysis and subgroup analysis of randomised trials.

Authors:  J T K Woon; I S L Zeng; T Calliess; H Windhagen; M Ettinger; H B Waterson; A D Toms; S W Young
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2018-06-30       Impact factor: 3.067

10.  Current concepts in total knee arthroplasty : mechanical, kinematic, anatomical, and functional alignment.

Authors:  Fahima A Begum; Babar Kayani; Ahmed A Magan; Justin S Chang; Fares S Haddad
Journal:  Bone Jt Open       Date:  2021-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.