Robotic-arm assisted bicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Durable results up to 7-year follow-up

Robot-assisted partial knee replacement versus standard total knee replacement (RoboKnees): a protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty is a common surgery for end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Partial knee arthroplasty is also a treatment option for patients with arthritis present in only one or two knee compartments. Partial knee arthroplasty can preserve the natural knee biomechanics, but these replacements may not last as long as total knee replacements. Robotic-assisted orthopedic techniques can help facilitate partial knee replacements, increasing accuracy and precision. This trial will investigate the feasibility and assess clinical outcomes for a larger definitive trial.

METHODS

This is a protocol for an ongoing parallel randomized pilot trial of 64 patients with uni- or bicompartmental knee arthritis. Patients are randomized to either receive robot-assisted partial knee arthroplasty or manual total knee arthroplasty. The primary outcome of this pilot is investigating the feasibility of a larger trial. Secondary (clinical) outcomes include joint awareness, return to activities, knee function, patient global impression of change, persistent post-surgical pain, re-operations, resource utilization and cost-effectiveness, health-related quality of life, radiographic alignment, knee kinematics during walking gait, and complications up to 24 months post-surgery.

DISCUSSION

The RoboKnees pilot study is the first step in determining the outcome of robot-assisted partial knee replacements. Conclusions from this study will be used to design future large-scale trials. This study will inform surgeons about the potential benefits of robot-assisted partial knee replacements.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT04378049) on 4 May 2020, before the first patient was randomized.

Reduced Early Revision Surgery and Medical Complications in Computer-assisted Knee Arthroplasty Compared With Non-computer-assisted Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Computer assistance can help surgeons achieve mechanical accurate alignment, but the clinical effect of this technology in different arthroplasty types remains controversial because of conflicting functional outcomes, revision rates, and complication rates. The goal of this study was to compare 90-day medical complications and 1 and 2-year revision surgeries after computer-assisted patellofemoral arthroplasty, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CA-UKA), bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CA-BKA), and total knee arthroplasty (CA-TKA) with non-computer-assisted procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using the Mariner data set of the PearlDiver Patient Records Database from 2010 to 2018. Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify patients who underwent patellofemoral arthroplasty, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, bicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and total knee arthroplasty with or without computer assistance for osteoarthritis. All included patients were followed up for 2 years. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

On multivariable analysis, revision within 1 year was decreased in patients who underwent computer-assisted patellofemoral arthroplasty (odds ratio [OR]: 0.541, P = 0.031), CA-UKA (OR: 0.798, P = 0.019), and computer-assisted bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (OR: 0.186, P = 0.025) compared with the same surgeries without technology assistance. CA-TKA had decreased odds of revision for aseptic loosening at 2 years (OR: 0.789, P < 0.001). CA-UKA and CA-TKA had decreased risk of overall 90-day medical complications (OR: 0.838, P < 0.001; OR: 0.903, P < 0.001, respectively) and major complications (OR: 0.750, P = 0.004; OR: 0.822, P < 0.001, respectively).

DISCUSSION

Complication rates and revision surgeries for all arthroplasty types were equivalent or more favorable when computer assistance was used during surgery. Our results quantify some early benefits to using computer assistance in total and partial knee arthroplasties.

Knee arthroplasty utilization trends from 2010 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Interest in partial knee arthroplasty procedures including unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA), patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), and bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BKA) has increased due to their bone and ligament preservation compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Implant designs, changing thoughts on appropriate indications for partial knee arthroplasty, and availability of navigation also impacted the field over the last decade. The aims of this study were to evaluate trends over the last decade in utilization of 1) partial and total knee arthroplasty; and 2) computer-assistance in knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using the PearlDiver database. Patients who underwent PFA, UKA, BKA, and TKA for an indication of osteoarthritis (OA) were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Trends analysis from 2010 to 2019 was conducted to compare utilization based on procedure type and computer-assistance. Statistical analysis was conducted using Compounded Annual Growth Rates (CAGR) and linear regression.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2019, there was a significant decrease in utilization of PFA (CAGR: -5.73 %; p = 0.011) and BKA (CAGR: -10.49 %; p = 0.013), but no significant difference in that of UKA (p = 0.224) and TKA (p = 0.421). There was a significant increase in the utilization of computer assistance for both UKA (CAGR: +19.81 %; p = 0.002) and TKA (CAGR: +3.90 %; p = 0.038), but there was no significant difference for computer-assisted PFA (p = 0.724) and BKA (p = 0.951).

CONCLUSIONS

TKA is still the most common arthroplasty procedure for OA. Decreased utilization of PFA and BKA may be explained by reported failure and revision rates for PFA and BKA compared to TKA.