![]() This may also increase the likelihood of component malalignments which could affect function and durability. This may increase the likelihood that an intra-operative injury to tendon or ligament might occur which could compromise the result. ![]() Operating through a smaller surgical window takes some getting used to and this can increase operative time compared to procedures performed using the traditional technique. Also even an experienced knee replacement surgeon will have performed many more surgeries through the traditional approach than through the less-invasive method we know that the more procedures one does the more reliable the results are. These studies give some insight into which patients and patterns of arthritis are most suitable for this procedure the relative novelty of the approach it is likely that as time passes we will discover more about the risks and shortcomings of this technique. Though surgeons have studied the approach the studies are recent and have replicated (repeated and verified) by only a few groups of surgeon-scientists. The major apparent risks of the procedure compared to traditional total knee replacement: This gives some reassurance that while the surgical approach is new the implants themselves have a good proven track record. Minimally-invasive quadriceps-sparing total knee replacement is an evolution of surgical technique which permits the use of time-tested implant designs (see figures 3 and 4). Much has been learned about implant design in the nearly 40-year history of contemporary knee replacement.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |