Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is associated with earlier discharge from physiotherapy and reduced length-of-stay compared to conventional navigated techniques

Robotic Versus Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Surgery: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Robotic-assisted surgery is a computer-controlled technique that may improve the accuracy and outcomes of unicompartmental total knee arthroplasty (TKA), a partial knee replacement surgery. The purpose of a meta-analysis about robotic-assisted versus conventional surgery for unicompartmental TKA is to compare the effectiveness of these two methods based on the current evidence. Our meta-analysis can help inform clinical decisions and guidelines for surgeons and patients who are considering unicompartmental TKA as a treatment option. We searched four online databases for studies that compared the two methods until March 2023. We used RevMan software to combine the data from the studies. We calculated the mean difference (MD) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome, which are statistical measures of the difference and the uncertainty between the two methods. We included 16 studies in our analysis. We found that robotic-assisted surgery had a better hip-knee-ankle angle, which is a measure of how well the knee is aligned, than conventional surgery (MD = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.16-1.56). We also found that robotic-assisted surgery had a better Oxford Knee score, which is a measure of how well the knee functions, than conventional surgery (MD = 3.03, 95% CI = 0.96-5.110). This study compared the results of conventional and robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in 12 studies. We concluded that robotic-assisted surgery may have some benefits over conventional surgery in terms of alignment and function of the knee. However, we did not find any significant difference between the two methods in terms of other outcomes, such as pain, range of motion, health status, and joint awareness. Therefore, we suggest that more research is needed to confirm these results and evaluate the long-term effects and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery.

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.

Pin-Related Complications in Computer Navigated and Robotic-Assisted Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Computer-assisted navigation (CAN) and robotic-assisted (RA) knee arthroplasty procedures carry unique risks of tracking pin-related complications. This systematic review aimed to quantitatively assess the incidence, timing, treatment, and clinical outcomes of all tracking pin-related complications following CAN and RA knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Central and Scopus databases. All clinical studies that documented pin-related complications associated with the use of CAN or RA for total or partial knee arthroplasty were included. Descriptive statistics were analyzed when data were available.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were included: 18 case reports (25 cases) and 18 randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and case series i.e., non-case reports (7,336 cases). The most common pin-related complication among case reports was fracture (n = 22; 81%). The overall rate of pin-related complications among non-case reports was 1.4%. The intraoperative and postoperative complication with the highest incidence were pin dislodgement (0.6%) and superficial pin site infections (0.6%), respectively. Most postoperative complications were related to the tibial site (69%). All complications were effectively treated and resolved at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Pin-related complications following CAN and RA knee arthroplasty are relatively uncommon. While pin loosening, superficial infections and fractures have been most commonly documented, other complications such as vascular injury, myositis ossificans, and osteomyelitis can also occur. The potential for pin-related complications should be considered by arthroplasty surgeons, especially during early stages of adoption. Further studies investigating patient risk factors for pin-related complications are warranted.

Robotic-assisted TKA reduces surgery duration, length of stay and 90-day complication rate of complex TKA to the level of noncomplex TKA

INTRODUCTION

Complex primary total knee arthroplasties (TKA) are reported to be associated with excessive episode of care (EOC) costs as compared to noncomplex procedures. The impact of robotic assistance (rTKA) on economic outcome parameters in greater case complexity has not been described yet. The purpose of this study was to investigate economic outcome parameters in the 90-days postoperative EOC in robotic-assisted complex versus noncomplex procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a retrospective, single-center review of 341 primary rTKAs performed between 2017 and 2020. Patient collective was stratified into complex (n = 218) and noncomplex TKA (n = 123) based on the presence of the following criteria: Obese BMI, coronal malalignment, flexion contracture > 10°, posttraumatic status, previous correction osteotomy, presence of hardware requiring removal during surgery, severe rheumatoid arthritis. Group comparison included surgery duration, length of stay (LOS), surgical site complications, readmissions, and revision procedures in the 90-days EOC following rTKA.

RESULTS

The mean surgery duration was marginally longer in complex rTKA, but showed no significant difference (75.26 vs. 72.24 min, p = 0.258), neither did the mean LOS, which was 8 days in both groups (p = 0.605). No differences between complex and noncomplex procedures were observed regarding 90-days complication rates (7.34 vs. 4.07%, p = 0.227), readmission rates (3.67 vs. 3.25%, p = 0.841), and revision rates (2.29 vs. 0.81%, p = 0.318).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted primary TKA reduces the surgical time, inpatient length of stay as well as 90-days complication and readmission rates of complex TKA to the level of noncomplex TKA. Greater case complexity does not seem to have a negative impact on economic outcome parameters when surgery is performed with robotic assistance.

Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Time-Driven Activity-Based Cost Analysis

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RA-UKA) remains unclear. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) has been shown to accurately reflect true resource utilization. This study aimed to compare true facility costs between RA-UKA and conventional UKA.

METHODS

We identified 265 consecutive UKAs (133 RA, 132 conventional) performed at a specialty hospital in 2016-2020. Itemized facility costs were calculated using TDABC. Separate analyses including and excluding implant costs were performed. Multiple regression was performed to determine the independent effect of robotic assistance on facility costs.

RESULTS

Due to longer operative time, RA-UKA patients had higher personnel costs and total facility costs ($2,270 vs $1,854, P < .001). Controlling for demographics and comorbidities, robotic assistance was associated with an increase in personnel costs of $399.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] $343.75-$454.74, P < .001), reduction in supply costs of $55.03 (95% CI $0.56-$109.50, P = .048), and increase in total facility costs of $344.27 (95% CI $265.24-$423.31, P < .001) per case. However, after factoring in implant costs, robotic assistance was associated with a reduction in total facility costs of $235.87 (95% CI $40.88-$430.85, P < .001) per case.

CONCLUSION

Using TDABC, overall facility costs were lower in RA-UKA despite a longer operative time. To facilitate wider adoption of this technology, implant manufacturers may negotiate lower implant costs based on volume commitments when robotic assistance is used. These supply cost savings appear to offset a portion of the increased costs. Nonetheless, further research is needed to determine if RA-UKA can improve clinical outcomes and create value in arthroplasty.