Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Content Type
      Content Type
      Clear All
      Content Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
40,912 result(s) for "Knee joint"
Sort by:
PSI kinematic versus non-PSI mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study
Purpose Kinematic alignment in TKA is supposed to restore function by aligning the components to the premorbid flexion–extension axis instead of altering the joint line and natural kinematic axes of the knee. The purpose of this study was to compare mechanically aligned TKA to kinematic alignment. Methods In this study, 200 patients underwent TKA and were randomly assigned to 2 groups: 100 TKAs were performed using kinematic alignment with custom-made cutting guides in order to complete cruciate-retaining TKA; the other 100 patients underwent TKA that was manually performed using mechanical alignment. The WOMAC and combined Knee Society Score (KSS), as well as radiological alignment, were determined as outcome parameters at the 12-month endpoint. Results WOMAC and KSS significantly improved in both groups. There was a significant difference in both scores between groups in favour of kinematic alignment. Although the kinematic alignment group demonstrated significantly better overall results, more outliers with poor outcomes were also seen in this group. A correlation between post-operative alignment deviation from the initial plan and poor outcomes was also noted. The most important finding of this study is that applying kinematic alignment in TKA achieves comparable results to mechanical alignment in TKA. This study also shows that restoring the premorbid flexion–extension axis of the knee joint leads to better overall functional results. Conclusion Kinematic alignment is a favourable technique for TKA. Clinical relevance The kinematic alignment idea might be a considerable alternative to mechanical alignment in the future. Level of evidence II.
Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Crossover Clinical Trial Comparing the Safety and Effectiveness of Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation With Corticosteroid Injection in the Management of Knee Pain From Osteoarthritis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESOsteoarthritis (OA) of the knee affects the aging population and has an associated influence on the health care system. Rigorous studies evaluating radiofrequency ablation for OA-related knee pain are lacking. This study compared long-term clinical safety and effectiveness of cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) with intra-articular steroid (IAS) injection in managing OA-related knee pain. METHODSThis is a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial with 151 subjects with chronic (≥6 months) knee pain that was unresponsive to conservative modalities. Knee pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]), Oxford Knee Score, overall treatment effect (Global Perceived Effect), analgesic drug use, and adverse events were compared between CRFA and IAS cohorts at 1, 3, and 6 months after intervention. RESULTSThere were no differences in demographics between study groups. At 6 months, the CRFA group had more favorable outcomes in NRSpain reduction 50% or greater74.1% versus 16.2%, P < 0.0001 (25.9% and 83.8% of these study cohorts, respectively, were nonresponders). Mean NRS score reduction was 4.9 ± 2.4 versus 1.3 ± 2.2, P < 0.0001; mean Oxford Knee Score was 35.7 ± 8.8 vs 22.4 ± 8.5, P < 0.0001; mean improved Global Perceived Effect was 91.4% vs 23.9%, P < 0.0001; and mean change in nonopioid medication use was CRFA > IAS (P = 0.02). There were no procedure-related serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONSThis study demonstrates that CRFA is an effective long-term therapeutic option for managing pain and improving physical function and quality of life for patients with painful knee OA when compared with IAS injection.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02343003).
Does Tourniquet Use in TKA Affect Recovery of Lower Extremity Strength and Function? A Randomized Trial
Background Tourniquet use during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) improves visibility and reduces intraoperative blood loss. However, tourniquet use may also have a negative impact on early recovery of muscle strength and lower extremity function after TKA. Questions/purposes The purpose of this study was (1) to determine whether tourniquet use affects recovery of quadriceps strength (primary outcome) during the first 3 postoperative months; and (2) to examine the effects of tourniquet application on secondary outcomes: voluntary quadriceps activation, hamstring strength, unilateral limb balance as well as the effect on operative time and blood loss. Methods Twenty-eight patients (mean age 62 ± 6 years; 16 men) undergoing same-day bilateral TKA (56 lower extremities) were enrolled in a prospective, randomized study. Subjects were randomized to receive a tourniquet-assisted knee arthroplasty on one lower extremity while the contralateral limb underwent knee arthroplasty without extended tourniquet use. In the former group, the tourniquet was inflated just before the incision was made and released after cementation; in the latter group, a tourniquet was not used (10 of 28 [36%]) or inflated only during component cementation (18 of 28 [64%]). The choice of no tourniquet or use just during cementation was based on surgeon choice, because some surgeons felt a tourniquet during cementation was necessary to achieve a dry surgical field to maximize cement fixation. A median parapatellar approach and the identical posterior-stabilized TKA design were used by all four fellowship-trained knee surgeons involved. Isometric quadriceps strength, hamstring strength, voluntary quadriceps activation, and unilateral balance were assessed preoperatively, 3 weeks, and 3 months after bilateral knee arthroplasty. Other factors, including pain, range of motion, and lower extremity girth, were assessed for descriptive purposes at each of these time points as well as on the second postoperative day. Results Quadriceps strength was slightly lower in the tourniquet group compared with the no-tourniquet group (group difference = 11.27 Nm [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.33–20.20]; p = 0.01), and these differences persisted at 3 months after surgery (group difference = 9.48 Nm [95% CI, 0.43–18.54]; p = 0.03). Hamstring strength did not differ between groups at any time point nor did measures of quadriceps voluntary activation or measures of unilateral balance ability. There was less estimated intraoperative blood loss in the tourniquet group (84 ± 26 mL) than in the no-tourniquet group (156 ± 63 mL) (group difference = −74 mL [95% CI, −100 to −49]; p < 0.001). However, there was no difference in total blood loss between the groups (group difference = −136 mL [95% CI, −318 to 45]; p = 0.13). Conclusions Patients who underwent TKA using a tourniquet had diminished quadriceps strength during the first 3 months after TKA, the clinical significance of which is unclear. Future studies may be warranted to examine the effects of tourniquet use on long-term strength and functional outcomes. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study.
Small Improvements in Mechanical Axis Alignment Achieved With MRI versus CT-based Patient-specific Instruments in TKA: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Background Patient-specific instrumentation in TKA has the proposed benefits of improving coronal and sagittal alignment and rotation of the components. In contrast, the literature is inconsistent if the use of patient-specific instrumentation improves alignment in comparison to conventional instrumentation. Depending on the manufacturer, patient-specific instrumentation is based on either MRI or CT scans. However, it is unknown whether one patient-specific instrumentation approach is more accurate than the other and if there is a potential benefit in terms of reduction of duration of surgery. Questions/purposes We compared the accuracy of MRI- and CT-based patient-specific instrumentation with conventional instrumentation and with each other in TKAs. The three approaches also were compared with respect to validated outcomes scores and duration of surgery. Methods A randomized clinical trial was conducted in which 90 patients were enrolled and divided into three groups: CT-based, MRI-based patient-specific instrumentation, and conventional instrumentation. The groups were not different regarding age, male/female sex distribution, and BMI. In all groups, coronal and sagittal alignments were measured on postoperative standing long-leg and lateral radiographs. Component rotation was measured on CT scans. Clinical outcomes (Knee Society and WOMAC scores) were evaluated preoperatively and at a mean of 3 months postoperatively and the duration of surgery was analyzed for each patient. MRI- and CT-based patient-specific instrumentation groups were first compared with conventional instrumentation, the patient-specific instrumentation groups were compared with each other, and all three approaches were compared for clinical outcome measures and duration of surgery. Results Compared with conventional instrumentation MRI- and CT-based patient-specific instrumentation showed higher accuracy regarding the coronal limb axis (MRI versus conventional, 1.0° [range, 0°–4°] versus 4.5° [range, 0°–8°], p < 0.001; CT versus conventional, 3.0° [range, 0°–5°] versus 4.5° [range, 0°–8°], p = 0.02), femoral rotation (MRI versus conventional, 1.0° [range, 0°–2°] versus 4.0° [range, 1°–7°], p < 0.001; CT versus conventional, 1.0° [range, 0°–2°] versus 4.0° [range, 1°–7°], p < 0.001), and tibial slope (MRI versus conventional, 1.0° [range, 0°–2°] versus 3.5° [range, 1°–7°], p < 0.001; CT versus conventional, 1.0° [range, 0°–2°] versus 3.5° [range, 1°–7°], p < 0.001), but the differences were small. Furthermore, MRI-based patient-specific instrumentation showed a smaller deviation in the postoperative coronal mechanical limb axis compared with CT-based patient-specific instrumentation (MRI versus CT, 1.0° [range, 0°–4°] versus 3.0° [range, 0°–5°], p = 0.03), while there was no difference in femoral rotation or tibial slope. Although there was a significant reduction of the duration of surgery in both patient-specific instrumentation groups in comparison to conventional instrumentation (MRI versus conventional, 58 minutes [range, 53–67 minutes] versus 76 minutes [range, 57–83 minutes], p < 0.001; CT versus conventional, 63 minutes [range, 59–69 minutes] versus 76 minutes [range, 57–83 minutes], p < .001), there were no differences in the postoperative Knee Society pain and function and WOMAC scores among the groups. Conclusions Although this study supports that patient-specific instrumentation increased accuracy compared with conventional instrumentation and that MRI-based patient-specific instrumentation is more accurate compared with CT-based patient-specific instrumentation regarding coronal mechanical limb axis, differences are only subtle and of questionable clinical relevance. Because there are no differences in the long-term clinical outcome or survivorship yet available, the widespread use of this technique cannot be recommended. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study. See the Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Robotic-assisted TKA leads to a better prosthesis alignment and a better joint line restoration as compared to conventional TKA: a prospective randomized controlled trial
Purpose Correct positioning and alignment of the prosthesis is a very important factor for durability of prosthesis and implant survival which is improved with the use of technology in total knee arthroplasty. However, the long-term functional outcomes and survivorship are unclear. For this study, it was hypothesized that mechanical axis alignment of lower limb, post-operative joint line restoration, femoral and tibial component alignment is more accurate with the new handheld semi-active robotic-assisted TKA. Method From April-2019 to March-2020, 60 patients with unilateral knee osteoarthritis who underwent total knee arthroplasties were included in this prospective randomised controlled study. Computer generated randomization was used. Study included 48 female patients and 12 male patients. Pre-operative and post-operative radiographic measurements were done and compared between the two groups. Results There was a significant difference between two groups with respect to mechanical axis deviation, joint line deviation and coronal alignment of femoral and tibial prosthesis. Mechanical axis deviation > 3° was seen in eight cases (28.5%) in C-TKA group compared to one case (3.1%) in RA-TKA ( p 0.019). Joint line deviation of 3.5 mm was noted in C-TKA group as compared to 0.9 mm in RA-TKA group ( p < 0.001) which was statistically significant. However, whether this difference of 2.6 mm of joint line elevation between C-TKA and RA-TKA leads to any difference in clinical outcome in terms of knee kinematics and knee flexion needs to be investigated with further studies. Clinically restoring normal joint line is important for improved knee function after primary TKA. No significant difference was noted in femoral component rotation on post-operative computed tomography (CT) scan. Conclusion The novel imageless, handheld semi-autonomous robotic system for TKA is highly accurate with respect to component positioning in coronal plane and mechanical alignment as compared to conventional TKA. Joint line is elevated in conventional TKA but is accurately restored using the robotic-assisted TKA which may lead to better patellofemoral kinematics. Level of evidence I.
Mid-flexion laxity in the asymptomatic native knee is predominantly present on the lateral side
Purpose During total knee arthroplasty (TKA), an orthopaedic surgeon is focused on soft-tissue balance in extension (0°) and in flexion (90°). Patients with instability problems of the knee often report a feeling of instability during daily life activities, at around 30° knee flexion. There are no reference values available for knee laxity of healthy subjects in mid-flexion (30°) and flexion (90°) for comparison with the TKA population. Therefore, the aim was to quantify varus and valgus knee laxity in extension, mid-flexion and flexion in the asymptomatic native knee. Methods In 40 healthy volunteers matched for age, gender and BMI with the TKA-population, varus and valgus knee laxity in extension (0°), mid-flexion (30°) and flexion (90°) was measured on low-dose radiographs. For each subject, one randomly selected knee was stressed in extension, mid-flexion and flexion (with 15 Nm) using a stress device. Results Varus laxity in mid-flexion was higher than in extension and flexion ( p  < 0.01). Valgus laxity tended to be highest in mid-flexion laxity; however, no differences in knee laxity between flexion angles were seen (n.s.). Varus knee laxity in extension was higher in females than in males ( p  < 0.05). Conclusions Mid-flexion laxity in the native knee is more prominent on the lateral side of the knee, while the medial side is more stable and constrained. Varus knee laxity in extension was shown to be higher in females than in males. Level of evidence Prognostic Level II.
Knee joint distraction compared with high tibial osteotomy: a randomized controlled trial
Purpose Both, knee joint distraction as a relatively new approach and valgus-producing opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO), are knee-preserving treatments for knee osteoarthritis (OA). The efficacy of knee joint distraction compared to HTO has not been reported. Methods Sixty-nine patients with medial knee joint OA with a varus axis deviation of <10° were randomized to either knee joint distraction ( n  = 23) or HTO ( n  = 46). Questionnaires were assessed at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months. Joint space width (JSW) as a surrogate measure for cartilage thickness was determined on standardized semi-flexed radiographs at baseline and 1-year follow-up. Results All patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) improved significantly over 1 year (at 1 year p  < 0.02) in both groups. At 1 year, the HTO group showed slightly greater improvement in 4 of the 16 PROMS ( p  < 0.05). The minimum medial compartment JSW increased 0.8 ± 1.0 mm in the knee joint distraction group ( p  = 0.001) and 0.4 ± 0.5 mm in the HTO group ( p  < 0.001), with minimum JSW improvement in favour of knee joint distraction ( p  = 0.05). The lateral compartment showed a small increase in the knee joint distraction group and a small decrease in the HTO group, leading to a significant increase in mean JSW for knee joint distraction only ( p  < 0.02). Conclusion Cartilaginous repair activity, as indicated by JSW, and clinical outcome improvement occurred with both, knee joint distraction and HTO. These findings suggest that knee joint distraction may be an alternative therapy for medial compartmental OA with a limited mechanical leg malalignment. Level of evidence Randomized controlled trial, Level I.
Modified kinematic alignment better restores plantar pressure distribution than mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial
Kinematic alignment (KA) in the short to medium term clinical outcomes is superior to the mechanical alignment (MA), but whether it will improve patients’ postoperative gait is still controversial. Understanding whether and how KA influences postoperative gait mechanics could provide insights into optimizing alignment philosophy to improve functional outcomes. To investigate the impact of KA versus MA in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on the operated and contralateral native lower limbs by analyzing plantar pressure distribution during walking gait. This study was designed as a secondary analysis from a randomized controlled trial. Thirty-seven patients were included, nineteen underwent KA-TKA and eighteen underwent MA-TKA, each with a native knee in the contralateral limb. Pressure-sensitive insoles were used to collect plantar pressure distribution of both limbs simultaneously during walking defined as medial-lateral load ratio (MLR). Perioperative characteristics including radiographic metrics (Hip-Knee-Ankle angle (HKA), mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA), and mechanical medial proximal tibial angle (mMPTA) and clinical outcomes (Oxford Knee Scores (OKS)) were compared between the two groups pre-operatively and 2-year postoperatively. Significant differences were found in postoperative radiographic metrics, with KA showing better OKS 1 year postoperatively ( p  = 0.021), lower mean HKA ( p  = 0.009) and mMPTA ( p  < 0.001). Other perioperative characteristics were similar between groups. In the pedobarographic analysis, the MA group demonstrated greater medial pressure distribution in forefoot compared to both the KA group ( p  < 0.001) and the contralateral native knee ( p  = 0.002). Besides, the MA group revealed a more lateral pressure distribution in rearfoot compared to the KA group ( p  = 0.007) and the contralateral native knee ( p  = 0.001). While there was no significant difference between KA and native group ( p  = 0.064 and p  = 0.802, respectively). KA offered advantages over MA in restoring a more physiologic plantar pressure distribution at two years postoperatively. These results underscore the potential clinical benefits of adopting KA techniques in TKA procedures.
Zoledronic acid reduces knee pain and bone marrow lesions over 1 year: a randomised controlled trial
Objectives To compare the effect of a single infusion of zoledronic acid (ZA) with placebo on knee pain and bone marrow lesions (BMLs). Methods Adults aged 50–80 years (n=59) with clinical knee osteoarthritis and knee BMLs were randomised to receive either ZA (5 mg/100 ml) or placebo. BMLs were determined using proton density-weighted fat saturation MR images at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Pain and function were measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) scale. Results At baseline, mean VAS score was 54 mm and mean total BML area was 468 mm2. VAS pain scores were significantly reduced in the ZA group compared with placebo after 6 months (−14.5 mm, 95% CI −28.1 to −0.9) but not after 3 or 12 months. Changes on the KOOS scales were not significant at any time point. Reduction in total BML area was greater in the ZA group compared with placebo after 6 months (−175.7 mm2, 95% CI −327.2 to −24.3) with a trend after 12 months (−146.5 mm2, 95% CI −307.5 to +14.5). A greater proportion of those in the ZA group achieved a clinically significant reduction in BML size at 6 months (39% vs 18%, p=0.044). Toxicity was as expected apart from a high rate of acute phase reactions in treatment and placebo arms. Conclusions ZA reduces knee pain and areal BML size and increases the proportion improving over 6 months. Treatment of osteoarthritis may benefit from a lesion specific therapeutic approach. Clinical trial registration number ACTRN 12609000399291.