Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Revista Chilena de Ortopedia y Traumatología 2017; 58(01): 007-012
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1599200
Original Article | Artículo Original
Thieme-Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Reemplazo parcial de rodilla mediante el sistema robótico NAVIO: resultados clínicos postquirúrgicos evaluados mediante Knee injury Osteoartritis Outcome Score

Robotic-Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Replacement with NAVIO Surgical System: Outcome Evaluation using the Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score
Pablo D. Vega Parra
1   Estudiante de Medicina, Universidad Adventista de la Plata, Entre Rios, Argentina
,
J. Dionisio Palacios Barajas
2   Fellowship de Ortopedia y Traumatología Deportiva, Reconstrucción Articular y Cirugía Ortopédica Robótica, Marquez Robotic Orthopedic Institute, Edinburg, Texas, United States
,
Raúl A. Márquez Ambrosi
3   Director en Reconstrucción Articular, Ortopedia y Traumatología Deportiva y Cirugía Ortopédica Robótica, Marquez Robotic Orthopedic Institute, Texas, United States
,
Jorge R. Duarte
4   Médico, Marquez Robotic Orthopedic Institute, Edinburg, Texas, United States
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

15 November 2016

02 December 2016

Publication Date:
28 March 2017 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Resumen

Introducción La osteoartritis de rodilla es una de las patologías musculo esqueléticas más prevalentes en el mundo, y el tratamiento quirúrgico es hasta hoy, la única terapia definitiva. El sistema NAVIO™ es uno de los dispositivos robóticos más recientemente a disposición para realizar el reemplazo parcial de rodilla. Ofrece gran precisión en el proceso de alineamiento, remodelado óseo y balance de los tejidos blandos, sin exponer al paciente a la radiación ni a los costos de la tomografía computarizada que suele realizarse con los sistemas robóticos actuales antes del procedimiento artroplástico.

Objetivo Evaluar los resultados medidos por los pacientes antes y después del procedimiento artroplástico mediante NAVIO™ y la prótesis STRIDE™.

Material y Método Aplicación del cuestionario Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) en el preoperatorio y a los 12 meses del procedimiento quirúrgico de los primeros 47 pacientes operados usando NAVIO™ en Cornerstone Regional Hospital, Edinburg, Texas.

Resultados Se observó una mejoría de las muestras normalizadas en todas las categorías con un p < 0.05.

Comentario Estudios recientes han sugerido que en Chile la presentación de la osteoartritis se asocia a un grado de severidad menor que en el resto de los países latinoamericanos. Lo cual torna relevante la aplicación de terapias quirúrgicas más conservadoras, que ofrezcan al paciente un alivio sintomático y le permitan reestablecerse a sus actividades cotidianas causando el mínimo impacto posible. Esas ventajas fueron observadas en los pacientes sometidos a ese procedimiento quirúrgico.

Conclusiones La artroplastia unicompartimental de rodilla mediante el sistema quirúrgico NAVIO™ y prótesis STRIDE™ demostró mejorar substancialmente la vida diaria y calidad de vida de los pacientes, disminuyendo el dolor y mejorando su función durante las actividades deportivas y recreacionales.

Abstract

Introduction Knee osteoarthritis is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal pathologies in the world and the surgical treatment is until today the only definitive therapy. NAVIO™ system is one of the most recently available robotic devices for partial knee arthroplasty. It offers great precision in the process of alignment, bone remodeling and soft tissue balancing without exposing the patient to the radiation or the costs of the CT scan usually performed before the arthroplasty with the current robotic systems.

Objective To evaluate the outcomes measured by the patients before and after the arthroplasty using NAVIO™ and the STRIDE™ prosthesis.

Materials and Methods Application of the Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire in the preoperative and 12 months after the surgical procedure of the first 47 patients operated using NAVIO™ at Cornerstone Regional Hospital, Edinburg, Texas.

Results There was an improvement of the normalized samples in all the categories with p < 0.05.

Commentary Recent studies have suggested that in Chile the presentation of osteoarthritis is associated with a lower degree of severity compared with the rest of Latin American countries. This makes relevant the application of more conservative surgical therapies, which could offer the patient symptomatic relief and allow them to reestablish their daily activities causing the minimum impact possible. These advantages were observed in patients undergoing this surgical procedure.

Conclusions Unicompartmental knee replacement using NAVIO ™ surgical system and STRIDE™ prosthesis demonstrated a substantial improvement in patient's quality of life, reducing pain and improving their function during sports and recreational activities.

Palabras clave

Reemplazo Parcial De Rodilla - procedimiento quirúrgico robótico - resultados evaluados por los pacientes

Keywords

unicompartimental knee arthroplasty - robotic surgical procedure - outcome measures
 

  • Referencias

  • 1 Mathers DSC, Pfleger B. . Global burden of osteoarthritis in the year 2000 http://cdrwww.who.int/entity/healthinfo/statistics/bod_osteoarthritis.pdf . Accessed May 20, 2016.
    PubMed
  • 2 Branco JC, Rodrigues AM, Gouveia N. , et al; EpiReumaPt study group. Prevalence of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases and their impact on health-related quality of life, physical function and mental health in Portugal: results from EpiReumaPt- a national health survey. RMD Open 2016; 2 (01) e000166
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Murray CJL, Vos T, Lozano R. , et al. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380 (9859): 2197-2223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cisternas MG, Murphy LB, Yelin EH, Foreman AJ, Pasta DJ, Helmick CG. Trends in medical care expenditures of US adults with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions 1997 to 2005. J Rheumatol 2009; 36 (11) 2531-2538
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 (04) 780-785
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Price AJ, Svard U. A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (01) 174-179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Laskin RS. Unicompartmental knee replacement: some unanswered questions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; (392) 267-271
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Gooberman-Hill R, Sansom A, Sanders CM. , et al. Unstated factors in orthopaedic decision-making: a qualitative study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2010; 11 (01) 213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hawker GA. Who, when, and why total joint replacement surgery? The patient's perspective. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2006; 18 (05) 526-530
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Cella D, Hahn EA, Jensen SE. , et al. Patient-reported outcomes in performance measurement. RTI. September 2015 https://www.rti.org/publication/patient-reported-outcomes-performance-measurement . Accessed December 27, 2016.
    PubMed
  • 11 Wylde V, Dieppe P, Hewlett S, Learmonth ID. Total knee replacement: is it really an effective procedure for all?. Knee 2007; 14 (06) 417-423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Baker PN, Petheram T, Jameson SS. , et al. Comparison of patient-reported outcome measures following total and unicondylar knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94 (07) 919-927
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Rana AJ. Building a Patient-Reported Outcome Metric Database: One Hospital's Experience. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (06) 1151-1154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Lyman S, Hidaka C. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures-What Data Do We Really Need?. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (06) 1144-1147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Witjes S, Gouttebarge V, Kuijer PPFM, van Geenen RCI, Poolman RW, Kerkhoffs GMMJ. Return to Sports and Physical Activity After Total and Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med 2016; 46 (02) 269-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hopper GP, Leach WJ. Participation in sporting activities following knee replacement: total versus unicompartmental. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008; 16 (10) 973-979
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Newman JH, Ackroyd CE, Shah NA. Unicompartmental or total knee replacement? Five-year results of a prospective, randomised trial of 102 osteoarthritic knees with unicompartmental arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80 (05) 862-865
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Wiik AV, Manning V, Strachan RK, Amis AA, Cobb JP. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty enables near normal gait at higher speeds, unlike total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (9, Suppl) 176-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kim HJ, Yoon J-R, Choi GW, Yang J-H. Imageless Navigation Versus Conventional Open Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy: A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies. Knee Surg Relat Res 2016; 28 (01) 16-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Keene G, Simpson D, Kalairajah Y. Limb alignment in computer-assisted minimally-invasive unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88 (01) 44-48
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Cobb J, Henckel J, Gomes P. , et al. Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88 (02) 188-197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Smith JR, Picard F, Lonner J. , et al. The Accuracy of a Robotically-Controlled Freehand Sculpting Tool for Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B (SUPP 16): 12-12
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lonner JH. Robotically Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with a Handheld Image-Free Sculpting Tool. Oper Tech Orthop 2015; 25 (02) 104-113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Hernigou P, Deschamps G. Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (423) 161-165
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Kim Y-H, Park J-W, Kim J-S, Park S-D. The relationship between the survival of total knee arthroplasty and postoperative coronal, sagittal and rotational alignment of knee prosthesis. Int Orthop 2014; 38 (02) 379-385
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Zhang GQ, Chen JY, Chai W, Liu M, Wang Y. Comparison between computer-assisted-navigation and conventional total knee arthroplasties in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral procedures: a randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011; 93 (13) 1190-1196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Methods and systems to control a shaping tool. April 2003 https://patents.google.com/patent/US6757582B2/en . Accessed December 26, 2016.
    PubMed
  • 28 Lonner JH, Smith JR, Picard F, Hamlin B, Rowe PJ, Riches PE. High degree of accuracy of a novel image-free handheld robot for unicondylar knee arthroplasty in a cadaveric study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (01) 206-212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Gregori A, Picard F, Bellemans J, Smith J, Simone A. . Handheld Precision Sculpting Tool for Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty. A clinical Review. 4–6 June. http://bluebelttech.com/site/wp-content/pdfs/Clinical_Review_Handheld_Precision_Sculting_Tool.pdf . Accessed June 13, 2016.
    PubMed
  • 30 Simons M, Riches P. The Learning Curve of Robotically-Assisted Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B (SUPP 11) 152-152
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES F. 510(K) Summary NAVIO PFS. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf12/K121936.pdf . Accessed November 14, 2016.
    PubMed
  • 32 STRIDE Unicondylar Knee System | Smith & Nephew - US Professional. http://www.smith-nephew.com/professional/products/all-products/stride/ . Accessed June 14, 2016.
    PubMed
  • 33 McEwen HMJ, Barnett PI, Bell CJ. , et al. The influence of design, materials and kinematics on the in vitro wear of total knee replacements. J Biomech 2005; 38 (02) 357-365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Stewart T, Jin ZM, Shaw D, Auger DD, Stone M, Fisher J. Experimental and theoretical study of the contact mechanics of five total knee joint replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 1995; 209 (04) 225-231
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988; 15 (12) 1833-1840
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Vaquero J, Longo UG, Forriol F, Martinelli N, Vethencourt R, Denaro V. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Spanish version of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in patients with chondral lesion of the knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (01) 104-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Ewa Roos. http://koos.nu/ . Accessed July 4, 2016.
    PubMed
  • 38 Reginato AM, Riera H, Vera M. , et al; Pan-American League of Associations for Rheumatology (PANLAR) Osteoarthritis Study Group. Osteoarthritis in Latin America: Study of Demographic and Clinical Characteristics in 3040 Patients. J Clin Rheumatol 2015; 21 (08) 391-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar