학술논문
Tibial baseplate positioning in robotic-assisted and conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
Document Type
Article
Source
Subject
*TIBIA surgery
*ACADEMIC medical centers
*ARTHROPLASTY
*ARTIFICIAL joints
*CONFIDENCE intervals
*FISHER exact test
*KNEE surgery
*LONGITUDINAL method
*HEALTH outcome assessment
*PROSTHETICS
*STATISTICAL hypothesis testing
*SURGICAL technology
*T-test (Statistics)
*TREATMENT effectiveness
*RETROSPECTIVE studies
*DATA analysis software
*DESCRIPTIVE statistics
*ODDS ratio
*EQUIPMENT & supplies
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Language
ISSN
1633-8065
Abstract
This study compared tibial baseplate alignment (TBA) between robotic-arm-assisted (RAA) and conventional (CONV) unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKAs). We hypothesized that RAA would increase the percentage of implants within a predetermined safe zone (SZ). We identified 177 CONV and 87 RAA UKAs through our center's patient registry. Two individuals reviewed postoperative knee radiographs and determined TBA. Coronal baseplate positioning was more accurate (i.e., within the SZ) for RAA (2.6° ± 1.5° vs. 3.9° ± 2.4°, p < 0. 0001). Conversely, sagittal alignment was more accurate for CONV (4.9° ± 2.8° vs. 2.4° ± 1.6°, p < 0.0001). RAA was more precise in both planes ( p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the percentage of implants within the SZ between the two groups ( p = 1.0). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]