Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional manual implantation of a primary total knee arthroplasty

Technology in Total Knee Arthroplasty in 2023

Over the past few decades, instrumentation and techniques for total knee arthroplasty have evolved from conventional manual tools to a wide range of technologies, including calibrated guides for accurate bone cuts and alignment, smart tools, dynamic intraoperative sensors for soft tissue balancing, patient-specific guides, computer navigation, and robotics. This review is intended to provide an overview of the latest advancements in total knee arthroplasty technology, address potential challenges and solutions related to the application of these technologies, and explore their limitations.

Comparing Rates of Minimal Clinically Important Difference Between Manual and Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between manual total knee arthroplasty (mTKA) and robotic-assisted TKA (rTKA) have not been adequately assessed. We compared the minimal clinically important difference for improvement (MCID-I) and Worsening (MCID-W) between mTKA and rTKA patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary TKA (874 mTKA, 439 rTKA) with complete pre-operative and one-year post-operative PROMs were retrospectively identified using a multi-hospital joint arthroplasty registry. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Short Form 10a (PROMIS PF-10a), PROMIS Global - Physical, or Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS) were collected. The MCID-I, MCID-W, and "no significant change" rates were calculated using distribution-based methods. Propensity-score matching was performed to control for confounding.

RESULTS

Similar 90-day pulmonary embolism (P = 0.26), deep venous thrombosis (P = 0.67), and emergency department visit (P = 0.35) rates were found. The 90-day readmission rate for mTKA was 1.7 and 3.4% for rTKA (P = 0.08), and overall revision rates were 2.2% for mTKA and 0.7% for rTKA (P = 0.07). Revision-free survival was 99% at one and two years for both groups (P = 0.65 and P = 0.43, respectively). There were no differences in the proportion of patients achieving MCID-I or MCID-W for PROMIS PF-10a, PROMIS Global - Physical, or KOOS-PS. The MCID-I for PROMIS PF-10a was achieved in 65.5 and 62.2% of patients who had mTKA and rTKA, respectively (P = 0.32).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated similar complication rates, and MCID-I and MCID-W attainment rates between mTKA and rTKA patients. Future studies should assess MCID attainment rates in the long term and in larger cohorts, comparing mTKA and rTKA.

A Restricted Functional Balancing Technique for Total Knee Arthroplasty With a Varus Deformity: Does a Medial Soft-Tissue Release Result in a Worse Outcome?

BACKGROUND

A functional alignment technique for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) utilizes implant position modifications to balance the soft tissues. There is concern that, in some cases, extreme coronal and tibial component alignment could facilitate early implant failure. To be cautious, a restricted functional alignment may be used. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the results of TKA in patients who have varus deformities using a restricted functional alignment technique. We hypothesized that adding a medial soft-tissue release within restricted boundaries would not result in inferior outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on robotic arm-assisted TKA patients with varus deformities utilizing a functional balancing strategy with a three-degree varus coronal limb and tibial component alignment restriction. Outcome scores of those patients still requiring a medial-soft tissue release were compared to those without for inferior outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 202 of 259 (78.0%) knees were able to be balanced without any medial soft-tissue release with an average final hip-knee-ankle alignment of 1.9° varus. The remaining 57 knees required a medial soft-tissue release. They had an average final hip-knee-ankle of 2.8° varus and an average medial proximal tibial angle of 2.5° varus. Comparing the cohorts without and with a release, at final follow-up averaging two years, there was not a statistically significant difference in Knee Society-Knee Score (97.7 and 98.4, P = .525), Functional Score (86.7 and 88.7, P = .514), Forgotten Joint Score (59.8 and 66.6, P = .136), and Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey for Joint Replacement Junior Score (79.5 and 84.8, P = .066).

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing a restrictive functional balancing strategy for TKA minimizes the need for soft-tissue releases and provides for excellent overall outcomes. An additional medial soft-tissue release can still be utilized without an inferior average two-year outcome.

Surgeon-Applied Stress and a Ligament Tensor Instrument Provide a Similar Assessment of Preresection Flexion Laxity During Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) allows surgeons to perform intraoperative soft tissue laxity assessments prior to bone resections and is used to alter resections to achieve gap balance. This study compared 2 techniques for flexion gap laxity assessment during RA-TKA.

Methods

A prospective study of 50 primary RA-TKAs performed by a single surgeon was conducted between February and October 2023. Following full exposure, anterior tibial dislocation, and osteophyte removal, maximal medial and lateral compartment flexion laxity was quantified to the nearest 0.5 mm by the robotic system using a dynamic, surgeon-applied stress (SURGEON). This data was used to plan a balanced flexion gap by adjusting the femoral component size, rotation, and anterior-posterior translation. Flexion laxity was quantified again after distal femoral and proximal tibial resections using a ligament tensor instrument (TENSOR). These new data were used to plan for the same desired flexion gap using the same variables. Paired-samples t-tests and a simple linear regression were used for analysis.

Results

Both methods produced near-identical recommendations for femoral component sizing (mean deviation 0.06 sizes, range -1 to +1 size; P = .569), rotation (deviation mean 1.0°, range -3.0° to +3.0°; P = .741), and anterior-posterior translation (deviation mean 0.13 mm, range -0.5 to +0.5 mm, P = .785). SURGEON femoral component rotation predicted TENSOR rotation (R2 = 0.157; 95% confidence interval = 0.124, 0.633; P = .004).

Conclusions

Assessing flexion laxity with a surgeon-applied stress vs a ligament tensor produced near-identical laxity data in RA-TKA, suggesting surgeons may comfortably choose either technique as a reliable method.

Level of Evidence

Level III.

Robots on the Stage: A Snapshot of the American Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty Market

» Computer-assisted robots aid orthopaedic surgeons in implant positioning and bony resection. Surgeons selecting a robot for their practice are faced with numerous options. This study aims to make the choice less daunting by reviewing the most commonly used Food and Drug Administration-approved robotic total knee arthroplasty platforms in the American arthroplasty market.» Modern total knee arthroplasty (TKA) robots use computer guidance to create a virtual knee model that serves as the surgeon's canvas for resection planning.» Most available robotic TKA (rTKA) systems are closed semiactive systems that restrict implant use to those of the manufacturer.» Each system has distinct imaging requirements, safety features, resection methods, and operating room footprints that will affect a surgeon's technique and practice.» Robots carry different purchase, maintenance, and equipment costs that will influence patient access across different socioeconomic groups.» Some studies show improved early patient-reported outcomes with rTKA, but long-term studies have yet to show clinical superiority over manual TKA.

Evaluating the accuracy of a new robotically assisted system in cadaveric total knee arthroplasty procedures

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been shown to facilitate high-precision bone resection, which is an important goal in TKA. The aim of this cadaveric study was to analyze the accuracy of the target angle and bone resection thickness of a recently introduced robotic TKA system.

METHODS

This study used 4 frozen cadaveric specimens (8 knees), 2 different implant designs, navigation, and a robotic system. The 4 surgeons who participated in this study were trained and familiar with the basic principles and operating procedures of this system. The angle of the bone cuts performed using the robotic system was compared with the target angles from the intraoperative plan. For each bone cut, the resection thickness was recorded and compared with the planned resection thickness.

RESULTS

The mean angular difference for all specimens was less than 1°, and the standard deviation was less than 2°. The mean difference between the planned and measured angles was close to 0 and not significantly different from 0 except for the difference in the frontal tibial component angle, which was 0.88°. The mean difference in the hip-knee-ankle axis angle was - 0.21°± 1.06°. The mean bone resection difference for all specimens was less than 1 mm, and the standard deviation was less than 0.5 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the cadaveric experimental study showed that the new TKA system can realize highly accurate bone cuts and achieve planned angles and resection thicknesses. Despite the limitations of small sample sizes and large differences between cadaveric and clinical patients, the accuracy of cadaveric experiments provides strong support for subsequent clinical trials.

Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Update

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a gold standard surgical procedure to improve pain and restore function in patients affected by moderate-to-severe severe gonarthrosis refractory to conservative treatments. Indeed, millions of these procedures are conducted yearly worldwide, with their number expected to increase in an ageing and more demanding population. Despite the progress that has been made in optimizing surgical techniques, prosthetic designs, and durability, up to 20% of patients are dissatisfied by the procedure or still report knee pain. From this perspective, the introduction of robotic TKA (R-TKA) in the late 1990s represented a valuable instrument in performing more accurate bone cuts and improving clinical outcomes. On the other hand, prolonged operative time, increased complications, and high costs of the devices slow down the diffusion of R-TKA. The advent of newer technological devices, including those using navigation systems, has made robotic surgery in the operatory room more common since the last decade. At present, many different robots are available, representing promising solutions to avoid persistent knee pain after TKA. We hereby describe their functionality, analyze potential benefits, and hint at future perspectives in this promising field.

Robotic-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Robotic knee arthroplasty procedures have emerged as a new trend, garnering attention from orthopedic surgeons globally. It has been hypothesized that the use of robotics enhances the accuracy of prosthesis positioning and alignment restoration. The objective of this study was to provide a high-level, evidence-based comparison between robotic total knee replacements and conventional methods, focusing on radiological and functional outcomes.

METHODS

We searched five databases from their inception until June 1, 2022, specifically targeting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the outcomes of robotic and conventional total knee replacements. We were interested in outcomes such as knee range of motion, clinical and function knee society scores, the Western Ontario and McMaster University score (WOMAC), the Hospital of Special Surgery score, complications, and radiological alignment. This review was carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes guidelines. We assessed the risk of bias using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2).

RESULTS

Our search returned seven RCTs suitable for our analysis, which included a total of 1942 knees; 974 of these knees were implanted using robotic arms while the remaining 968 utilized jig-based knee systems. Our findings indicated that robotic knees had significantly better post-operative anatomical (OR - 0.82; 95% CI, - 1.027 to - 0.58, p value < 0.00001) and mechanical restoration (OR - 0.95; 95% CI, - 1.49 to - 0.41, p value < 0.0006). While knee range of motion (OR - 2.23; 95% CI - 4.89-0.43, p value 0.1) and femoral prosthesis position (OR - 0.98; 95% CI, - 2.03-0.08, p value 0.07) also favored robotic knees, these differences did not reach statistical significance. Both clinical and functional outcomes, as well as the rate of complications, were found to be statistically similar between the groups undergoing robotic and traditional knee replacement surgeries.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that robotic total knee replacements offer superior post-operative anatomical and mechanical alignment compared to conventional total knee replacements. Despite this, clinical and functional outcomes, as well as complication rates, were similar between the two. These findings should be considered in light of potential confounding factors. More randomized controlled trials with the latest robotic systems are needed to confirm any superior functional and clinical outcomes from robotic-assisted surgeries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Decreased stress shielding with poly-ether-ether-ketone tibial implant for total knee arthroplasty - A preliminary study using finite element analysis

In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the mechanical mismatch between cobalt-chromium (CoCr) alloy tibial implant and bone has been implicated in stress shielding and subsequent implant failure and bone resorption. This study investigates the biomechanical advantages of poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) tibial implant, which exhibit properties analogous to those of the surrounding bone. A finite element analysis (FEA) was employed to assess and compare the biomechanical performances of PEEK and CoCr tibial implants in patients with and without osteoporosis. Four FEA models were constructed with PEEK and CoCr alloy implants in normal and osteoporotic tibias. Based on previous literature and our clinical experience, stresses measurements were taken at 16 points on the tibial plateau and 8 points on the two surfaces which were 10 mm and 20 mm apart from the tibial plateau, with specific regions quantified for stress shielding. The results showed significant differences in stress distribution between PEEK and CoCr implants. The PEEK implants exhibited higher equivalent stresses on the tibial plateau in all models (normal bone: 0.22 ± 0.07 MPa vs. 0.13 ± 0.06 MPa, p < 0.01; osteoporotic bone: 0.39 ± 0.06 MPa vs. 0.17 ± 0.07 MPa, p < 0.01). In non-osteoporotic models, the mean equivalent stresses on proximal tibial surfaces were similarly elevated for PEEK implants (0.29 ± 0.13 MPa vs. 0.21 ± 0.08 MPa, p = 0.02). The CoCr implants demonstrated more stress shielding across all measured regions (tibial plateau: 23.47% vs. 2.73%; surface 1: 15.93% vs. 1.37%; surface 2: 10.71% vs. 6.56%). These disparities were even more pronounced in osteoporotic models in the CoCr group (tibial plateau: 32.50% vs. 8.36%). The maximum equivalent stresses on the tibial plateau further supported this trend (normal bone: 1.02 MPa vs. 0.52 MPa; osteoporotic bone: 1.43 MPa vs. 0.67 MPa). These data confirm the hypothesis that a PEEK tibial implant can reduce peri-prosthetic stress shielding, suggesting that PEEK implants have the capability to distribute loads more uniformly and maintain a closer approximation to physiological conditions.

Five historical innovations that have shaped modern orthopaedic surgery

Throughout history, many innovations have contributed to the development of modern orthopaedic surgery, improving patient outcomes and expanding the range of treatment options available to patients. This article explores five key historical innovations that have shaped modern orthopaedic surgery: X-ray imaging, bone cement, the Thomas splint, the Pneumatic tourniquet and robotic-assisted surgery. We will review the development, impact and significance of each innovation, highlighting their contributions to the field of orthopaedic surgery and their ongoing relevance in contemporary and perioperative practice.

Robotic-assisted TKA is Not Associated With Decreased Odds of Early Revision: An Analysis of the American Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted TKA continues to see wider clinical use, despite limited knowledge of its impact on patient satisfaction and implant survival. Most studies to date have presented small cohorts and came from single-surgeon or single-center experiences. Therefore, a population-level comparison of revision rates between robotic-assisted and conventional TKA in the registry setting may help arthroplasty surgeons better define whether robotic assistance provides a meaningful advantage compared with the conventional technique.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) After controlling for confounding variables, such as surgeon, location of surgery, and patient comorbidity profile, were robotic-assisted TKAs less likely than conventional TKAs to result in revision for any reason at 2 years? (2) After again controlling for confounding variables, were robotic-assisted TKAs less likely to result in any specific reasons for revision than the conventional technique at 2 years?

METHODS

The American Joint Replacement Registry was used to identify patients 65 years or older who underwent TKA between January 2017 and March 2020 with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Patients were limited to age 65 yeas or older to link TKAs to Medicare claims data. Two retrospective cohorts were created: robotic-assisted TKA and conventional TKA. Patient demographic variables included in the analysis were age, gender, BMI, and race. Additional characteristics included the Charlson comorbidity index, anesthesia type, year of the index procedure, and length of stay. A total of 10% (14,216 of 142,550) of TKAs performed during this study period used robotics. Patients with robotic-assisted TKA and those with conventional TKA were similar regarding age (73 ± 6 years versus 73 ± 6 years; p = 0.31) and gender (62% [8736 of 14,126] versus 62% [79,399 of 128,334] women; p = 0.34). A multivariable, mixed-effects logistic regression model was created to analyze the odds of all-cause revision as a factor of robot use, and a logistic regression model was created to investigate specific revision diagnoses.

RESULTS

After controlling for potentially confounding variables, such as surgeon, location of surgery, and Charlson comorbidity index, we found no difference between the robotic-assisted and conventional TKAs in terms of the odds of revision at 2 years (OR of robotic-assisted versus conventional TKA 1.0 [95% CI 0.8 to 1.3]; p = 0.92). The reasons for revision of robotic-assisted TKA did not differ from those of conventional TKA, except for an increased odds of instability (OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.0 to 2.4]; p = 0.04) and pain (OR 2.1 [95% CI 1.4 to 3.0]; p < 0.001) in the robotic-assisted cohort.

CONCLUSION

In light of these findings, surgeons should not assume that robotic assistance in TKA will lead to improved early implant survival. Our findings do not support an improvement over conventional TKA with robotic assistance with regards to common causes of early revisions such malalignment, malposition, stiffness, pain, and instability, and in some cases, suggest there is a benefit to conventional TKA. Differences in the mid-term and long-term revision risk with conventional versus robotic-assisted TKA remain unknown. Appropriate informed consent around the use of robotic assistance should not imply decreased early revision risk.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline Summary of Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee

The Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline is based on a systematic review of published studies for surgical management of osteoarthritis of the knee in skeletally mature patients. This guideline contains 16 recommendations and seven options to assist orthopaedic surgeons and all qualified physicians with the surgical management of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee based on the best current available evidence. It is also intended to serve as an information resource for professional healthcare practitioners and developers of practice guidelines and recommendations. In addition to providing pragmatic practice recommendations, this guideline also highlights gaps in the literature and informs areas for future research and quality measure development.

Fostering Excellence in Knee Arthroplasty: Developing Optimal Patient Care Pathways and Inspiring Knowledge Transfer of Advanced Surgical Techniques

Osteoarthritis of the knee is common. Early sports trauma or cartilage defects are risk factors for osteoarthritis. If conservative treatment fails, partial or total joint replacement is often performed. A joint replacement aims to restore physiological biomechanics and the quality of life of affected patients. Total knee arthroplasty is one of the most performed surgeries in musculoskeletal medicine. Several developments have taken place over the last decades that have truly altered the way we look at knee arthroplasty today. Some of the fascinating aspects will be presented and discussed in the present narrative review.

Initial Learning Curve for Robot-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty in a Dedicated Orthopedics Center

Background and objectives: Our study aimed to assess the learning curve for robot-assisted (RA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in our hospital, compare operative times between RA-TKAs and manual TKAs, and assess the early complications rate between the two approaches. Methods: We included 39 patients who underwent RA-TKA and 45 control patients subjected to manual TKA in the same period and operated on by the same surgical staff. We collected demographic and patient-related data to assess potential differences between the two groups. Results: No statistical differences were recorded in regard to age, BMI, sex, Kellgren-Lawrence classification, or limb alignment between patients undergoing RA-TKA and manual TKA, respectively. Three surgeons transitioned from the learning to the proficiency phase in our study after a number of 6, 4, and 3 cases, respectively. The overall operative time for the learning phase was 111.54 ± 20.45 min, significantly longer compared to the average of 86.43 ± 19.09 min in the proficiency phase (p = 0.0154) and 80.56 ± 17.03 min for manual TKAs (p < 0.0001). No statistically significant difference was recorded between the global operative time for the proficiency phase TKAs versus the controls. No major complications were recorded in either RA-TKA or manual TKA groups. Conclusions: Our results suggest that experienced surgeons may adopt RA-TKA using this platform and quickly adapt without significant complications.

Intra-operative Safety of an Autonomous Robotic System for Total Knee Replacement: A Review of 500 Cases in India

Background

Manual total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been documented several times for their safety and complications data. In contrast, there is a limited evidence-based analysis for safety and complications of autonomous robotic-assisted (RA)-TKA. This study aimed to evaluate the safety features and intra-operative surgical complications associated with the use of Cuvis Joint™ autonomous robotic system for TKA.

Methods

The study included 500 consecutive patients who underwent TKA using the Cuvis Joint™ autonomous robotic system from November 2020 to November 2021. All surgeries were performed by a senior surgeon. Patients in whom the surgery was abandoned midway due to technical errors, were excluded from the analysis. In case of unilateral abandonment of the robotic arm during a bilateral RA-TKA, data of the side on which the surgery was completed with robotic assistance was recorded.

Results

There was no incidence of neurological injury, vascular injury, extensor mechanism disruption, or medial collateral ligament injury. There was one case of superficial abrasion of the patellar tendon; however, it did not require any intervention. There were no cases of midway abandonment due to threatened soft tissue injury. There was no intra-operative pin loosening or stress-related fractures at the pin sites. There was one case of Steinmann pin breakage and another case of drill bit breakage, which were removed without any damage to the bone.

Conclusion

The Cuvis Joint™ autonomous robotic system for TKA is safe with no significant intra-operative complications.

The landscape of surgical robotics in orthopedics surgery

Orthopedic surgery is one of the first surgical specialties to apply surgical robotics in clinical practice, which has become an interesting field over the years with promising results. Surgical robotics can facilitate total joint arthroplasty by providing robotic support to accurately prepare the bone, improving the ability to reproduce alignment, and restoring normal kinematics. Various robotic systems are available on the market, each tailored to specific types of surgeries and characterized by a series of features with different requirements and/or modus operandi. Here, a narrative review of the current state of surgical robotic systems for total joint knee arthroplasty is presented, covering the different categories of robots, which are classified based on the operation, requirements, and level of interaction with the surgeon. The different robotic systems include closed/open platform, image-based/imageless, and passive/active/semi-active systems. The main goal of a robotic system is to increase the accuracy and precision of the operation regardless of the type of system. Despite the short history of surgical robots, they have shown clinical effectiveness compared to conventional techniques in orthopedic surgery. When considering which robotic system to use, surgeons should carefully evaluate the different benefits and drawbacks to select the surgical robot that fits their needs the best.

Robotic-assisted mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty does not lead to better clinical and radiological outcomes when compared to conventional TKA: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (R-TKA) has emerged as an alternative to improve the results of the conventional manual TKA (C-TKA). The aim of this study was to analyse the high-level studies comparing R-TKA and C-TKA in terms of clinical outcomes, radiological results, perioperative parameters, and complications.

METHODS

The literature search was conducted on three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science) on 1 February 2023 according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled trials (RCTs), written in English language, published in the last 15 years, focusing on the comparison of C-TKA and R-TKA results. The quality of each article was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials version 2 (RoB 2). The statistical analysis was carried out using random effects (DerSimonian & Laird) for weighted mean difference (MD) of the continuous variables and Peto method for odds ratios of the dichotomous variables.

RESULTS

Among the 2905 articles retrieved, 14 RCTs on 12 series of patients treated with mechanically aligned implants were included. A total of 2255 patients (25.1% males and 74.9% females; mean age 62.9 ± 3.0; mean BMI 28.1 ± 1.3) were analysed. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis showed that R-TKA did not provide overall superior results compared to C-TKA in mechanically aligned implants in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes. R-TKA showed longer operative time (MD = 15.3 min, p = 0.004) and similar complication rates compared to C-TKA. A statistically significant difference in favour of R-TKA was found in the posterior-stabilized subgroup in terms of radiological outcomes (hip-knee-ankle angle MD = 1.7, p < 0.001) compared to C-TKA, although without resulting in appreciable difference of clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

R-TKA did not provide overall superior results compared to C-TKA in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes, showing longer operative time and similar complication rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Safe Zones and Trajectory of Femoral Pin Placement in Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty may result in array pin-related complications. Lack of knowledge on ideal pin placement results in varied insertion sites and trajectory, with unknown risks to surrounding neurovascular structures.

Methods

This study included 10 lower-extremity magnetic resonance images. Images were subdivided into 6 zones of study. Zones consisted of a correlating axial image with femoral pin placement replicated by drawing a line angled 45° from the anterior to posterior reference in the anteromedial to posterolateral femoral quadrants. The distances from the pin paths to the neurovascular structures were measured.

Results

Zone 2C demonstrated femoral pin trajectory an average of 14 mm from the femoral artery/vein. In Zone 2B, proximity increased to an average of 30 mm to the femoral artery and 29 mm to the femoral vein. At Zone 1A, the popliteal artery and vein were on average 22 mm from the femoral pin, while the common peroneal nerve was an average of 21 mm. Placing pins in Zone 1A poses a high risk of injury to the genicular arteries. Women demonstrated greater proximity to neurovascular structures than men in 66% of the sites (P < .05).

Conclusions

This classification system for safe zones and trajectory of femoral pin placement in robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrates that proximally, the profunda femoris and femoral artery/vein are at risk of injury, while distally, the genicular arteries, common peroneal nerve, and popliteal artery/vein are at risk. Caution should be exercised if femoral pins are inserted with an angle less than 45°, especially in women.

Is robotic assistance more eye-catching than computer navigation in joint arthroplasty? A Google trends analysis from the point of public interest

Computer-assisted navigation system (CAS) and robotic assisted surgery (RAS) have been widely used in joint arthroplasty, but few studies focused on public interest. We aimed to evaluate current trend and seasonality of public interest in CAS and RAS arthroplasty over the past 10 years, and forecast the future development. All data related to CAS or RAS arthroplasty from January 2012 to December 2021 were collected through Google Trends. Public interest was described by relative search volume (RSV). Pre-existing trend was evaluated by linear and exponential models. Time series analysis and ARIMA model were utilized to analyze the seasonality and future trend. R software 3.5.0 was for statistics analysis. Public interest in RAS arthroplasty has been continuously increasing (P < 0.001) and exponential model (R2 = 0.83, MAE = 7.35, MAPE = 34%, RSME = 9.58) fitted better than linear one (R2 = 0.78, MAE = 8.44, MAPE = 42%, RSME = 10.67). CAS arthroplasty showed a downtrend (P < 0.01) with equivalent R2 (0.04) and accuracy measures (MAE = 3.92, MAPE = 31%, RSME = 4.95). The greatest popularity of RAS was observed in July and October, while the lowest was in March and December. For CAS, a rise of public interest was in May and October, but lower values were observed in January and November. Based on ARIMA models, the popularity of RAS might continuously increase and nearly double in 2030, along with a stability with slight downtrend for CAS. Public interest in RAS arthroplasty has been continuously increasing and seems to maintain this uptrend in the next 10 years, whereas popularity of CAS arthroplasty will likely remain stable.

[Translated article] Current situation of robotics in knee prosthetic surgery: A technology that has come to stay?

Robotic surgery is a surgical technique that is on the rise. The goal of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) is to provide the surgeon with a tool to accurately execute bone cuts according to previous surgical planning to restore knee kinematics and balance of soft tissue, being able to precisely apply the type of alignment that we choose. In addition, RA-TKA is a very useful tool for training. Within the limitations, there is the learning curve, the need for specific equipment, the high cost of the devices, the increase in radiation in some systems and that each robot is linked to a specific type of implant. Current studies show, with RA-TKA, variations in the alignment of the mechanical axis are reduced, postoperative pain is improved and earlier discharge is facilitated. On the other hand, there are no differences in terms of range of motion, alignment, gap balance, complications, surgical time or functional results.

Learning curve and short-term clinical outcomes of a new seven-axis robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty system: a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to determine the learning curve for a novel seven-axis robot-assisted (RA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) system and to explore whether it could provide superior short-term clinical and radiological outcomes compared with conventional surgery.

METHODS

In the present retrospective study, 90 patients who underwent RA-TKA were included in robot-assisted system (RAS) group and 90 patients who underwent conventional TKA were included in the conventional group. The duration of surgery and robot-related complications were recorded to evaluate the learning curve through cumulative sum and risk-adjusted cumulative sum methods. The demographic data, preoperative clinical data, preoperative imaging data, duration of surgery, alignment of the prosthesis, lower limb force line alignment, Knee Society score, 10-cm visual analog scale pain score and range of motion were compared between the RAS and conventional groups. In addition, the proficiency group was compared with the conventional group using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

RA-TKA was associated with a learning curve of 20 cases for the duration of surgery. There was no significant difference in indicators representing the accuracy of the prosthetic installation between the learning and proficiency phases in RA-TKA group patients. A total of 49 patients in the proficiency group were matched with 49 patients from the conventional group. The number of postoperative hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle, component femoral coronal angle (CFCA), component tibial coronal angle (CTCA), and sagittal tibial component angle (STCA) outliers in the proficiency phase was lower than that in the conventional group, while deviations of the HKA angle, CFCA, CTCA, and STCA in the proficiency phase were significantly lower than those in the conventional group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In summary, from the learning curve data, 20 cases are required for a surgeon using a novel seven-axis RA-TKA system to enter the proficiency phase. In the proficiency group, compared with the conventional group using propensity score matching, the RAS was found to be superior to the conventional group in prosthesis and lower limb alignment.

Robotic technology in total knee arthroplasty

Key factors for successful total knee arthroplasty include accurate implant positioning with precise tibial and femoral resection, combined with appropriate soft tissue balancing to achieve the desired alignment. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty allows surgeons to execute pre-planned strategies with precision, with growing evidence suggesting that robotic-assisted-total knee arthroplasty reduces radiological outliers. This has yet to be proven to translate into long-term improvements in patient-reported outcomes and implant survivorship. Robotic-assisted-total knee arthroplasty systems can be divided into fully autonomous and semi-autonomous systems. While fully autonomous systems showed initial promise, semi-autonomous systems are gaining popularity with encouraging early outcomes suggesting improved radiological and clinical outcomes, although concerns remain regarding a significant learning curve, installation costs, radiation exposure and cost associated with preoperative imaging. The future of total knee arthroplasty seems certain to involve robotic technology, although to what degree and in what capacity will depend on further high-quality studies assessing long-term outcomes, complications, survivorship and cost-benefit analyses.

Clinical evaluation of the first semi-active total knee arthroplasty assisting robot made in China: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The precision of overall alignment and knee morphotype after robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty has been fully confirmed. This study aims to conduct a clinical evaluation of the first China-made semi-active total knee arthroplasty assisting robot.

METHODS

After a 1 : 2 propensity score matching, that is, a matched cohort study, patients were matched to the robot group (52 cases) and the conventional group (104 cases). The robot group received osteotomy according to preoperative planning, while the conventional group adopted preoperative planning based on the full-length radiograph and received conventional osteotomy. Perioperative clinical indicators, such as operation time, tourniquet time, hospitalization days, intraoperative bleeding, and hemoglobin level of the two groups were recorded; radiological indicators of postoperative prosthesis position, including hip-knee-ankle angle, frontal femoral component angle, frontal tibial component angle, lateral femoral component angle, and lateral tibial component angle were also recorded; deviations and outliers of the radiological indicators were calculated.

RESULTS

Compared with the conventional group, the operation time and tourniquet time of the robot group were longer, and the postoperative hemoglobin level decreased less, the differences were statistically significant; the lateral tibial component angle of the conventional group was 80.9°±3.6°, which was smaller than 86.7 °±2.3° of the robot group, the difference was statistically significant ( P <0.001); except for lateral femoral component angle, the absolute deviations of the radiological indicators in the robot group were significantly smaller than that in the conventional group ( P ≤0.001); the outliers of the radiological indicators in the robot group were significantly smaller than that in the conventional group with a statistical difference ( P <0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the conventional group, the operation time of the robot group was relatively longer, but the perioperation blood loss was less. The robot group could better control the posterior inclination of the tibial prosthesis, and the absolute deviations and outliers of the prosthesis position were relatively smaller. There was no difference in short-term clinical score between the two groups.

Robotic-assisted knee replacement surgery & infection: A historical foundation, systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

An increasing proportion of Knee arthroplasty is performed using robotic-assisted surgical techniques. This study sought to use a meta-analytical approach to establish summary rates of surgical site infection in robotic-assisted procedures and compare the rate of deep infections to those seen in conventional knee arthroplasty.

Methods

This study performed a literature search across four online databases to establish a summary rate of surgical site infection across two categories: deep infection and superficial and pin-site infections. This was processed with the aid of a bespoke data-extraction tool. Risk of Bias analysis was performed using the Cochrane RoB2 tool. Meta-analysis was then performed with tests for heterogeneity and a DerSimonian-Laird random effects model.

Results

A total of 17 studies were identified as appropriate for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The summary rate of overall surgical site infections within one year of robotic knee arthroplasty was found to be 0.568% (SE = 0.183, 95% CI = 0.209-0.927). Deep infections fell to 0.154% (SE = 0.069, 95% CI = 0.018-0.290) and to 0.347% (SE = 0.109, 95% CI = 0.133-0.561) in superficial and pin-site infections.

Conclusion

The surgical site infection rates were found to be low across robotic knee arthroplasty. Further research is required to prove its superiority compared to the conventional, non-robotic technique.

Clinical, Radiographic, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Associated with a Handheld Image-free Robotic-Assisted Surgical System in Total Knee Arthroplasty

One of the primary aims of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is restoration of the mechanical axis of the lower limb. Maintenance of the mechanical axis within 3° of neutral has been shown to result in improved clinical results and implant longevity. Handheld image-free robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (HI-TKA) is a novel way of performing TKA in the era of modern robotic-assisted TKA. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of achieving targeted alignment, component placement, clinical outcomes, as well as patient satisfaction after HI-TKA.

Clinical and radiological outcomes of robotic-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) is an alternative surgical treatment method to conventional total knee arthroplasty (COTKA) that may deliver better surgical accuracy. However, its impact on patient outcomes is uncertain. The aim of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is to evaluate whether RATKA could improve functional and radiological outcomes compared with COTKA in adult patients with primary osteoarthritis of the knee.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library to identify published RCTs comparing RATKA with COTKA. 2 reviewers independently screened eligible studies, reviewed the full texts, assessed risk of bias using the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool, and extracted data. Outcomes were patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, and mechanical alignment (MA) deviation and outliers, and complications.

RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs involving 2,200 patients. RATKA probably results in little to no effect on patient-reported outcomes (mean difference (MD) in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score of -0.35 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.78 to 0.07) and range of motion (MD -0.73°; CI -7.5° to 6.0°) compared with COTKA. However, RATKA likely results in a lower degree of MA outliers (risk ratio 0.43; CI 0.27 to 0.67) and less deviation from neutral MA (MD -0.94°; CI -1.1° to -0.73°). There were no differences in revision rate or major adverse effects associated with RATKA.

CONCLUSION

Although RATKA likely results in higher radiologic accuracy than COTKA, this may not be clinically meaningful. Also, there is probably no clinically important difference in clinical outcomes between RATKA and COTKA, while it is as yet inconclusive regarding the revision and complication rates due to insufficient evidence.

Surgical accuracy and clinical outcomes of image-free robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The development of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for knee osteoarthritis (OA) has a good reputation for its effectiveness in reducing joint pain and improving range of motion. We aimed to review our early results using the image-free robotic-assisted technology in knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A total of 71 patients suffering from end-stage OA knee receiving TKA operated by robotic-assisted surgery between the years 2018 and mid-2021 were recruited. Clinical and radiological outcomes were compared with age and sex-matched control group (conventional TKA).

RESULTS

The radiological outcome showed significantly more postoperative lower limb alignment outliers in conventional side than robotic-assisted sides. Postoperative knee scores were similar among both groups. Robotic-assisted TKA required a longer implantation time but a shorter hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted TKA achieved a lower rate of mechanical axis Outlier in the coronal and sagittal plane with a shorter hospital stay. Yet both methods achieve a similar functional outcome.

Automated elaborate resection planning for bone tumor surgery

PURPOSE

Planning for bone tumor resection surgery is a technically demanding and time-consuming task, reliant on manual positioning of planar cuts in a virtual space. More elaborate cutting approaches may be possible through the use of surgical robots or patient-specific instruments; however, methods for preparing such a resection plan must be developed.

METHODS

This work describes an automated approach for generating conformal bone tumor resection plans, where the resection geometry is defined by the convex hull of the tumor, and a focal point. The resection geometry is optimized using particle swarm, where the volume of healthy bone collaterally resected with the tumor is minimized. The approach was compared to manually prepared planar resection plans from an experienced surgeon for 20 tumor cases.

RESULTS

It was found that algorithm-generated hull-type resections greatly reduced the volume of collaterally resected healthy bone. The hull-type resections resulted in statistically significant improvements compared to the manual approach (paired t test, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The described approach has potential to improve patient outcomes by reducing the volume of healthy bone collaterally resected with the tumor and preserving nearby critical anatomy.

Complications and downsides of the robotic total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review is to describe the complications and downsides of robotic systems in total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

A comprehensive search according to the PRISMA guidelines was performed across PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Google Scholar from inception until December 2021. All articles of any study design directly reporting on complications and downsides of the robotic system in TKA were considered for inclusion. Risk of bias assessment was performed for all included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias and MINORS score.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were included, consisting of 4 randomized controlled trials, 7 prospective studies and 10 retrospective studies. Complications of the robotic system were pin-hole fracture, pin-related infection, iatrogenic soft tissue and bony injury, and excessive blood loss. While, downsides were longer operative duration, higher intraoperative cost, learning curve and aborting a robotic TKA due to different reasons. Iatrogenic injuries were more common in the active robotic system and abortion of the robotic TKA was reported only with active robotic TKA.

CONCLUSION

Robotic TKA is associated with certain advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, surgeons need to be familiar with the system to use it effectively. Widespread adoption of the robotic system should always be evidence-based.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Alignment accuracy and functional outcomes between hand-held navigation and conventional instruments in TKA: a randomized controlled trial

Background

This study assessed surgical accuracy and functional outcomes using hand-held accelerometer-based navigation following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Question: (1) Does hand-held navigation (the iAssist system) improve surgical accuracy (assessed with five parameters commonly used to evaluate surgical alignment: the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), femoral coronal angle (FCA), tibial coronal angle (TCA), femoral sagittal angle (FSA), and tibial slope angle (TSA)) compared to conventional instruments in TKA? (2) Which surgical alignment parameters among HKA, FCA, TCA, FSA, and TSA can obtain the most advantage from the iAssist system? (3) Does the iAssist system lead to better functional outcomes at two years of follow-up after TKA?

Methods

This parallel-group double-blinded randomized controlled trial recruited 60 patients (30 patients each in the iAssist and conventional group) with osteoarthritis who underwent primary TKA by a single surgeon at Siriraj Hospital. There was no loss to follow-up in the study. All procedures in both groups were performed using similar surgical exposure, prosthesis implant, perioperative and postoperative protocols. Participants in the iAssist group received the iAssist system as an assistive technique, while those in the conventional group only had conventional instruments. Surgical alignments (HKA, FCA, TCA, FSA, and TSA) were recorded using CT scan at six weeks post-operation. Functional outcomes were assessed with knee ROM, KSS, and EQ-5D at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operation. Baseline characteristics including age, sex, the affected knee side, and body mass index were comparable between the two groups, similar to preoperative ROM, KSS, and EQ-5D.

Results

The mean operative time was relatively longer in the iAssist than the conventional group, although not statistically significant (88.1 ± 13.7 versus 83.4 ± 21.3; p = 0.314). Among the surgical alignment parameters evaluated, FCA was the only radiographic parameter with a statistically significant difference between the two groups and was closer to 90º in the iAssist group (89.4 ± 2.2 in the iAssist versus 87.2 ± 2.1 in the conventional group; p = 0.003). Also, there was a higher proportion of outliers in the conventional than the iAssist group (23.3% versus 10%; p = 0.086). Nonetheless, HKA and TCA did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.25 and 0.096, respectively), although the percentages of outliers were higher in the conventional than the iAssist group (HKA: 26.7% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.101 and TCA: 6.7% versus 0%; p = 0.078). Likewise, we observed other radiographic parameters had no significant group differences, including FSA and TSA. Furthermore, at two years post-operation, we found no differences between the iAssist and the conventional group in knee ROM (106.7 ± 14.6 versus 108.2 ± 12.7; p = 0.324), KSS (82.5 ± 6.4 versus 83.8 ± 3.4; p = 0.324), and EQ-5D (0.9 ± 0.2 versus 1.0 ± 0.1; p = 0.217). All functional outcomes were also comparable at 6 months and 12 months of follow-up postoperatively.

Conclusion

The iAssist technology increase surgical precision by allowing for a more precise FCA with fewer outliers than conventional equipment. iAssist had longer operative time. Functional outcomes and quality of life were not different.

Level of evidence:

I

Artificial Intelligence in Modern Orthopaedics: Current and Future Applications

➢

With increasing computing power, artificial intelligence (AI) has gained traction in all aspects of health care delivery. Orthopaedics is no exception because the influence of AI technology has become intricately linked with its advancement as evidenced by increasing interest and research.

➢

This review is written for the orthopaedic surgeon to develop a better understanding of the main clinical applications and potential benefits of AI within their day-to-day practice.

➢

A brief and easy-to-understand foundation for what AI is and the different terminology used within the literature is first provided, followed by a summary of the newest research on AI applications demonstrating increased accuracy and convenience in risk stratification, clinical decision-making support, and robotically assisted surgery.

The evolution of robotic systems for total knee arthroplasty, each system must be assessed for its own value: a systematic review of clinical evidence and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Robotic systems have been introduced to improve the precision of total knee arthroplasty. However, different robotic systems are available, each with unique features used to plan and execute the surgery. As such, due to this diversity, the clinical evaluation of each robotic platform should be separated.

METHODS

An extensive literature search of PubMed, Medline, Embase and Web of Science was conducted with subsequent meta-analysis. Randomised controlled trials, comparative studies, and cohort studies were included regarding robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Evaluated outcomes included clinical results, surgical precision, ligament balance, surgical time, learning curve, complications and revision rates. These were split up based on the robot-specific brand: ROBODOC (T-SOLUTION ONE), OMNIBOT, MAKO, NAVIO (CORI) and ROSA.

RESULTS

With a follow-up of more than 10 years, no improved clinical outcomes have been noted with the ROBODOC system compared to the conventional technique. If available, other platforms only present short-term clinical outcomes. Radiological outcomes are published for most robotic setups, demonstrating improved surgical precision compared to the conventional technique. Gap balance assessment is performed differently between all systems, leading to heterogeneous outcomes regarding its relationship on clinical outcomes. There is a similar learning curve based on operative time for all robotic platforms. In most studies, robot assistance requires longer operative time compared to the conventional technique. Complications and revision rates are published for ROBODOC and MAKO, without clear differences to conventional total knee arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

The main finding of this systematic review is that the current evidence regarding each robotic system is diverse in quantity and quality. Each system has its own specificities and must be assessed for its own value. Regarding scientific literature, the generic term of robotic should be banned from the general conclusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review level IV.

[Market overview: Robotic-assisted arthroplasty : Current robotic systems, learning curve and cost analysis]

Robotic-assisted arthroplasty has been rapidly entering clinical routine in recent years. The leading endoprosthesis manufacturers have all meanwhile placed robotic systems on the market, which, however, differ significantly from one another technically. Current systems are currently classified according to the degree of autonomy (active vs. semi-active vs. passive) and the data/image source (image-based: CT vs. X‑ray, imageless). Some systems already offer the possibility of robotic-assisted or navigated implantation of hip endoprostheses. In the following review article, the currently leading robotic systems will be presented and compared with regard to their characteristics. Furthermore, the analysis of the learning curves for the different systems, currently available cost analysis models and an outlook on future developments and challenges will be given.

No Benefit to Sensor-guided Balancing Compared With Freehand Balancing in TKA: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Soft tissue balancing in TKA has traditionally relied on surgeons' subjective tactile feedback. Although sensor-guided balancing devices have been proposed to provide more objective feedback, it is unclear whether their use improves patient outcomes.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing freehand balancing with the use of a sensor-guided balancing device and evaluated (1) knee ROM, (2) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (SF-12, WOMAC, and Knee Society Functional Scores [KSFS]), and (3) various surgical and hospital parameters (such as operative time, length of stay [LOS], and surgical complications) at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 152 patients scheduled for primary TKA were recruited and provided informed consent to participate in this this study. Of these, 22 patients were excluded preoperatively, intraoperatively, or postoperatively due to patient request, surgery cancellation, anatomical exclusion criteria determined during surgery, technical issues with the sensor device, or loss to follow-up. After the minimum 2-year follow-up was accounted for, there were 63 sensor-guided and 67 freehand patients, for a total of 130 patients undergoing primary TKA for osteoarthritis. The procedures were performed by one of three fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons (RPS, HJC, JAG) and were randomized to either soft tissue balancing via a freehand technique or with a sensor-guided balancing device at one institution from December 2017 to December 2018. There was no difference in the mean age (72 ± 8 years versus 70 ± 9 years, mean difference 2; p = 0.11), BMI (30 ± 6 kg/m 2 versus 29 ± 6 kg/m 2 , mean difference 1; p = 0.83), gender (79% women versus 70% women; p = 0.22), and American Society of Anesthesiology score (2 ± 1 versus 2 ± 1, mean difference 0; p = 0.92) between the sensor-guided and freehand groups, respectively. For both groups, soft tissue balancing was performed after all bony cuts were completed and trial components inserted, with the primary difference in technique being the ability to quantify the intercompartmental balance using the trial tibial insert embedded with a wireless sensor in the sensor-guided cohort. Implant manufacturers were not standardized. Primary outcomes were knee ROM and PROMs at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Secondary outcomes included pain level evaluated by the VAS, opioid consumption, inpatient physical therapy performance, LOS, discharge disposition, surgical complications, and reoperations.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the mean knee ROM at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively between the sensor-guided cohort (113° ± 11°, 119° ± 13°, and 116° ± 12°, respectively) and the freehand cohort (116° ± 13° [p = 0.36], 117° ± 13° [p = 0.41], and 117° ± 12° [p = 0.87], respectively). There was no difference in SF-12 physical, SF-12 mental, WOMAC pain, WOMAC stiffness, WOMAC function, and KSFS scores between the cohorts at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. The mean operative time in the sensor-guided cohort was longer than that in the freehand cohort (107 ± 0.02 versus 84 ± 0.04 minutes, mean difference = 23 minutes; p = 0.008), but there were no differences in LOS, physical therapy performance, VAS pain scores, opioid consumption, discharge disposition, surgical complications, or percentages of patients in each group who underwent reoperation.

CONCLUSION

This RCT demonstrated that at 2 years postoperatively, the use of a sensor-balancing device for soft tissue balancing in TKA did not confer any additional benefit in terms of knee ROM, PROMs, and clinical outcomes. Given the significantly increased operative time and costs associated with the use of a sensor-balancing device, we recommend against its routine use in clinical practice by experienced surgeons.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Robotic Versus Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty in High Volume Surgeons: A Comparison of Cost and Quality Metrics

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RTKA) was introduced to improve surgical accuracy and patient outcomes. However, RTKA may also increase operating time and add cost to TKA. This study sought to compare the differences in cost and quality measures between manual TKA (MTKA) and RTKA METHODS: All MTKAs and RTKAs performed between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019, by 6 high volume surgeons in each cohort, were retrospectively reviewed. Cohorts were propensity score matched. Operative time, length of stay (LOS), total direct cost, 90-day complications, utilization of postacute services, and 30-day readmissions were studied.

RESULTS

After one-to-one matching, 2392 MTKAs and 2392 RTKAs were studied. In-room/out-of-room operating time was longer for RTKA (139 minutes) than for MTKA (107 minutes) P < .0001, as was procedure time (RTKA 78 minutes; MTKA 70 minutes), P < .0001. Median LOS was equal for MTKA and RTKA (33 hours). Total cost per case was greater for RTKA ($11,615) than MTKA ($8674), P < .0001. Home health care was utilized more frequently after RTKA (38%) than MTKA (29%), P < .0001. There was no significant difference in 90-day complication rates. Thirty-day readmissions occurred more often after MTKA (4.9%) than RTKA (1.2%), P < .0001.

CONCLUSION

RTKA was a longer and costlier procedure than MTKA for experienced surgeons, without clinically significant differences in LOS or complications. Home health care was utilized more often after RTKA, but fewer readmissions occurred after RTKA. Longer term follow-up and functional outcome studies are required to determine if the greater cost of RTKA is offset by lower revision rates and/or improved functional results.

Robot-assisted knee arthroplasty improves component positioning and alignment, but results are inconclusive on whether it improves clinical scores or reduces complications and revisions: a systematic overview of meta-analyses

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic overview was to identify, synthesise and critically appraise findings of meta-analyses on robot-assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The hypothesis was that robotic assistance would reduce complications and revision rates, yield better clinical scores, and improve component positioning and alignment.

METHODS

Two researchers independently conducted a literature search using Embase^®, MEDLINE^®, Web of Science, Allied and Complementary Medicine™ and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 2 November 2020 for meta-analyses (Level I-IV) on robotic assistance in UKA and/or TKA. Outcomes were tabulated and reported as weighted mean difference (WMD), risk ratio (RR) or weighted odds ratio (WOR), and were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of ten meta-analyses were identified; four on robot-assisted UKA (n, 1880 robot-assisted vs. 2352 conventional UKA; follow-up, 0 to 60 months), seven on robot-assisted TKA (n, 4567 robot-assisted vs. 5966 conventional TKA; follow-up, 0 to 132 months). Of the meta-analyses on UKA, one found that robotic assistance reduced complication rates (relative risk (RR), 0.62), one found that it improved clinical scores (weighted mean difference (WMD), 19.67), three found that it extended operation times (WMD, 15.7 to 17.1 min), and three found that it improved component positioning and alignment (WMD, - 1.30 to - 3.02 degrees). Of the meta-analyses on TKA, two found that robotic assistance improved clinical scores (WMD, 1.62-1.71), two found that that it extended surgery times (WMD, 21.5-24.26 min), and five found that it improved component positioning and alignment (WMD, - 0.50 to - 10.07 degrees). None of the meta-analyses reported differences in survivorship between robot-assisted versus conventional knee arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted knee arthroplasty enabled more accurate component positioning and placement within target zones, but extended operation time considerably. Although robotic assistance improved component positioning, its benefits regarding clinical scores, patient satisfaction and implant survivorship remains to be confirmed. Finally, this overview revealed that six of the ten meta-analyses were of 'critically low quality', calling for caution when interpreting results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Are there avoidable causes of early revision total knee arthroplasty?

Introduction

Surgeons can improve their practice by understanding potentially avoidable reasons for early revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The purpose of this study is to describe potentially avoidable indications for rTKA within 5 years of the index procedure.

Methods

This retrospective observational analysis utilized the rTKA database at a large, academic orthopedic specialty hospital to identify 167 consecutive rTKA from 2014 to 2019 performed within 5 years after primary TKA (pTKA). Two fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons reviewed the cases to classify them as potentially avoidable or unavoidable. Unavoidable indications for rTKA included infection/wound complication, arthrofibrosis, instability due to underlying collagen disease or significant weight loss, and any traumatic event leading to pTKA failure. Potentially avoidable indications included atraumatic instability, intraoperative fracture, metal allergy, and atraumatic patellar instability or maltracking. Aseptic loosening was considered avoidable if it occurred in the presence of component malpositioning or poor cementation technique.

Results

There were 112 (67.1%) unavoidable cases and 55 avoidable cases (32.9%). Of the unavoidable cases, there were 68 rTKA for infection or wound complications (60.7%), 23 for arthrofibrosis (20.5%), 6 for instability (5.4%), 6 for postoperative fracture (5.4%), 6 for aseptic loosening (5.4%), and 3 for extensor mechanism pathology following trauma (2.6%). Of the potentially avoidable rTKA, 24 were for aseptic loosening (43.7%), 23 for atraumatic instability (41.8%), 6 for atraumatic extensor mechanism pathology (10.9%), 1 for nickel allergy (1.8%), and 1 for intraoperative fracture (1.8%).

Conclusion

These findings indicate that over 30% of early rTKA are potentially avoidable. Interventions should focus on addressing potentially avoidable causes such as short-term aseptic loosening and instability to reduce the need for costly and resource-intensive rTKA.

Level of evidence III, retrospective observational analysis

Robotic-assisted surgery and kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty (RASKAL study): a protocol of a national registry-nested, multicentre, 2×2 factorial randomised trial assessing clinical, intraoperative, functional, radiographic and survivorship outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) and kinematic alignment (KA) are being increasingly adopted to improve patient outcomes in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There is uncertainty around the individual or combined effect of these concepts compared with computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and mechanical alignment (MA), respectively. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of RAS, KA or both to improve clinical outcomes, functional measures, radiographic precision and prosthetic survivorship when compared with current gold standards of surgical care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A national registry-nested, multicentre, double-blinded, 2×2 factorial, randomised trial will be undertaken with 300 patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA performed by 15 surgeons. The primary outcome will be the between-group differences in postoperative change over 2 years in the mean Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS-12), comparing first, RAS to CAS as its control, and second, KA to MA as its control. Secondary outcomes will include other knee-specific and general health patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), intraoperative pressure loads as a measure of soft tissue balance, 6-month postoperative functional outcomes, radiological precision using CT imaging, complications and long-term prosthetic survivorship. The contribution of each patient's unique coronal plane alignment of the knee phenotype to primary and secondary PROMs will be investigated. OMERACT-OARSI criteria and Patient Acceptable Symptom State outcome score thresholds for the KOOS-12 and Oxford Knee Score will be used in secondary analyses. Primary intention-to-treat and secondary per-protocol analyses will be performed. Statistical analysis will include a generalised linear mixed model for repeated measures for continuous KOOS-12 scores. Kaplan-Meier estimates with adjusted HRs of implant survivorship will be calculated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from Sydney Local Health District-Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (Approval X20-0494 and 2020/ETH02896 10.24/DEC20). Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented in national, state and international meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621000205831.

Patient Interest in Robotic Total Joint Arthroplasty Is Exponential: A 10-Year Google Trends Analysis

Background

The use of robotics in arthroplasty continues to increase. Patient demand, patient expectations, and patient-directed marketing by industry and care providers each likely contributes to its increasing popularity. Trends in patient interest have not been well described. We used the online Google Trends tool to analyze trends in national public interest toward robotic and nonrobotic arthroplasty between 2011 and 2021.

Material and methods

Google Trends online was queried for search terms related to nonrobotic hip and knee arthroplasty in addition to robotic hip, robotic knee, and general robotic arthroplasty between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2021.

Results

Google Trends Data demonstrated a significant linear increase in online searches related to nonrobotic total knee and hip arthroplasty. Online search volume for robotic hip arthroplasty was significant and linear, while that of robotic knee arthroplasty was significant and exponential. When combined, robotic joint arthroplasty demonstrated an exponential trend over the 10-year period. This increase was noted to be statistically significant when compared with nonrobotic arthroplasty search volume.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates that public interest in robotic total joint arthroplasty has increased significantly from 2011 through 2020. When compared with online search volume for conventional arthroplasty, this increasing growth is statistically significant. Public interest in robotic arthroplasty is anticipated to continue to increase, and care providers should be aware of this trend that impacts patient perceptions and expectations. Despite significant growth in interest for robotic arthroplasty, there is incomplete evidence supporting its use over nonrobotic arthroplasty. Additional high-quality studies are needed to inform provider decision-making and appropriately guide public interest in robot-assisted arthroplasty.

Robotic arm-assisted versus manual unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : a systematic review and meta-analysis of the MAKO robotic system

AIMS

This systematic review aims to compare the precision of component positioning, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and learning curves of MAKO robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RAUKA) with manual medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (mUKA).

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar were performed in November 2021 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta--Analysis statement. Search terms included "robotic", "unicompartmental", "knee", and "arthroplasty". Published clinical research articles reporting the learning curves and cost-effectiveness of MAKO RAUKA, and those comparing the component precision, functional outcomes, survivorship, or complications with mUKA, were included for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 179 articles were identified from initial screening, of which 14 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. The papers analyzed include one on learning curve, five on implant positioning, six on functional outcomes, five on complications, six on survivorship, and three on cost. The learning curve was six cases for operating time and zero for precision. There was consistent evidence of more precise implant positioning with MAKO RAUKA. Meta-analysis demonstrated lower overall complication rates associated with MAKO RAUKA (OR 2.18 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06 to 4.49); p = 0.040) but no difference in re-intervention, infection, Knee Society Score (KSS; mean difference 1.64 (95% CI -3.00 to 6.27); p = 0.490), or Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score (mean difference -0.58 (95% CI -3.55 to 2.38); p = 0.700). MAKO RAUKA was shown to be a cost-effective procedure, but this was directly related to volume.

CONCLUSION

MAKO RAUKA was associated with improved precision of component positioning but was not associated with improved PROMs using the KSS and WOMAC scores. Future longer-term studies should report functional outcomes, potentially using scores with minimal ceiling effects and survival to assess whether the improved precision of MAKO RAUKA results in better outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):541-548.

Early Superior Clinical Outcomes in Robotic-Assisted TKA Compared to Conventional TKA in the Same Patient: A Comparative Analysis

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has demonstrated improved alignment and outcome scores when compared with manual total knee arthroplasty (M-TKA); however, few studies compare differences in the same patient. This study is a retrospective review that assesses clinical outcomes of 36 patients who underwent a primary RA-TKA and had undergone a prior contralateral M-TKA. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon at the same institution. Patients were assessed for differences in hospital length of stay, improvement in pre- versus postoperative range of motion, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores. Student's t-test and Fisher's exact test were utilized to detect significant differences. Patient demographics showed a mean age of 64.5, 24 females (67%), and mean body mass index of 35.1 ± 5.7. The average follow-up time was 2.9 years for M-TKA and 1.3 years for RA-TKA. Hospital length of stay was decreased by 5.5 hours for RA-TKA (p = 0.03). Total postoperative WOMAC score was not statistically different between RA-TKA and M-TKA (p = 0.061); however, pain and stiffness components were statistically improved in RA-TKA (p = 0.041 and p = 0.007), respectively. KOOS was higher in RA-TKA, which approached statistical significance (p = 0.005). Pre- versus postoperative knee flexion improved significantly in both cohorts. There was a significant difference in pre- versus postoperative range of motion at 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up after RA-TKA in comparison to M-TKA (p < 0.05). There were no postoperative complications. Patients who underwent RA-TKA demonstrated early improvement at 1-year follow-up in pain, stiffness, and knee flexion when compared with their prior contralateral M-TKA. There was a significant decrease in postoperative length of stay by 5.5 hours in the RA-TKA group. Limitations include a small sample size and differences in follow-up times between RA-TKA and M-TKA.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Markov Model-Based Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus conventional manual TKA in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

A Markov model simulated the lifetime outcomes of TKA of patients at average age 60 years. Costs of robotic-assisted TKA included a preoperative CT scan and the costs for acquisition and use of robotic equipment (average $706,250). We used three institutional case volumes to generate average per-case robotic costs: low volume (10 cases, $71,025 per case), mid volume (100 cases, $7,463 per case), and high volume (200 cases, $3,931 per case). Systematic reviews were used to determine early (≤1 year) and late (> 1 year) revision rates after robotic-assisted TKA (0.3 and 0.6%, respectively) and conventional TKA (0.78% and 1.5%, respectively). Outcomes were total costs and health outcomes measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs and QALYs were organized into incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). A procedure was considered cost-effective if its ICER fell below willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the effect of data uncertainty.

RESULTS

Robotic-assisted TKA produced 13.55 QALYs versus 13.29 QALYs for conventional TKA. Total costs per case for robotic-assisted TKA were $92,823 (low volume), $29,261 (mid volume), and $25,730 (high volume) compared with $25,113 for conventional. The ICERs for robotic-assisted TKAs were $256,055/QALY (low volume), $15,685/QALY (mid volume), and $2,331/QALY (high volume). ICERs for mid- and high-volume institutions were below WTP. Average number needed to treat was >42 and >24 robotic-assisted TKAs for cost-effectiveness at the $50,000 and $100,000/QALY WTP. Robotic-assisted TKAs remained cost-effective when annual revision rates <1.6% and quality of life values were >0.85.

CONCLUSION

With lower annualized revision rates and higher postoperative quality of life, robotic-assisted TKAs potentially offer improved health outcomes, especially when annual institutional case volume >24 cases per year. Continued prospective investigation will be crucial to demonstrate the value of this new technology.

Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with a learning curve for surgical time but not for component alignment, limb alignment and gap balancing

PURPOSE

The application of robotics in the operating theatre for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. As with all new technology, the introduction of new systems is associated with a learning curve and potentially associated with extra complications. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify and predict the learning curve of robot-assisted (RA) TKA.

METHODS

A RA TKA system (MAKO) was introduced in April 2018 in our service. A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients receiving a TKA with this system by six surgeons. Operative times, implant and limb alignment, intraoperative joint balance and robot-related complications were evaluated. Cumulative summation (CUSUM) analyses were used to assess learning curves for operative time, implant alignment and joint balance in RA TKA. Linear regression was performed to predict the learning curve of each surgeon.

RESULTS

RA TKA was associated with a learning curve of 11-43 cases for operative time (p < 0.001). This learning curve was significantly affected by the surgical profile (high vs. medium vs. low volume). A complete normalisation of operative times was seen in four out of five surgeons. The precision of implant positioning and gap balancing showed no learning curve. An average deviation of 0.2° (SD 1.4), 0.7° (SD 1.1), 1.2 (SD 2.1), 0.2° (SD 2.9) and 0.3 (SD 2.4) for the mLDFA, MPTA, HKA, PDFA and PPTA from the preoperative plan was observed. Limb alignment showed a mean deviation of 1.2° (SD 2.1) towards valgus postoperatively compared to the intraoperative plan. One tibial stress fracture was seen as a complication due to suboptimal positioning of the registration pins.

CONCLUSION

RA TKA is associated with a learning curve for surgical time, which might be longer than reported in current literature and dependent on the profile of the surgeon. There is no learning curve for component alignment, limb alignment and gap balancing.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Accuracies of bone resection, implant position, and limb alignment in robotic-arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a prospective single-centre study

Objective

This study assessed the accuracy of robotic-arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) for bone resection, component size prediction, implant placement, and limb alignment.

Methods

This prospective cohort study included 36 patients. All procedures were performed by a single experienced surgeon, using an identical approach and implant designs. The MAKO RIO Robotic Interactive Orthopaedic Arm (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ, USA) system was used. The actual bone resection, implant placement, component size, and postoperative mechanical alignment were recorded, then compared with the preoperative plan.

Results

The mean absolute differences from the plan for the distal (medial and lateral) and posterior (medial and lateral) femoral cuts were 0.39 mm (0.62), 0.49 mm (0.70), 0.62 mm (0.79), and 0.65 mm (0.81), respectively, with 0.57° (0.65) varus. The mean absolute differences in the medial and lateral tibial cuts were 0.56 mm (0.75) and 0.58 mm (0.76), with 0.48° (0.16) varus and 0.54° (0.25) anterior/posterior slope. Of 192 bone resections, 176 (91.7%) were within ≤ 1 mm of the preoperative plan. The accuracies of femoral and tibial component size prediction were 100% and 97.22%, respectively. The mean absolute difference in final limb coronal alignment was 0.92° (0.65). Of the alignments, 18 (75.0%) were within ≤ 1.00° of the plan, and 100% were within ≤ 3.00° of the plan.

Conclusion

RATKA could accurately predict the component size and execute a preoperative plan to achieve precise bone resection, and implant placement, thereby reducing alignment outliers.

Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved accuracy and patient reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the accuracy of component positioning, alignment and balancing techniques employed, patient-reported outcomes, and complications of robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) with manual TKA (mTKA) and the associated learning curve. Searches of PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar were performed in October 2020 using PRISMA guidelines. Search terms included "robotic", "knee" and "arthroplasty". The criteria for inclusion were published clinical research articles reporting the learning curve for RATKA and those comparing the component position accuracy, alignment and balancing techniques, functional outcomes, or complications with mTKA. There were 198 articles identified, following full text screening, 16 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria and reported the learning curve of rTKA (n=5), component positioning accuracy (n=6), alignment and balancing techniques (n=7), functional outcomes (n=7), or complications (n=5). Two studies reported the learning curve using CUSUM analysis to establish an inflexion point for proficiency which ranged from 7 to 11 cases and there was no learning curve for component positioning accuracy. The meta-analysis showed a significantly lower difference between planned component position and implanted component position, and the spread was narrower for RATKA compared with the mTKA group (Femur coronal: mean 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.55, p<0.00001; Tibia coronal: mean 1.56, 95% CI 1.32-1.81, p<0.00001). Three studies reported using different alignment and balancing techniques between mTKA and RATKA, two studies used the same for both group and two studies did not state the methods used in their RATKA groups. RATKA resulted in better Knee Society Score compared to mTKA in the short-to-mid-term follow up (95%CI [- 1.23,  - 0.51], p=0.004). There was no difference in arthrofibrosis, superficial and deep infection, wound dehiscence, or overall complication rates. RATKA demonstrated improved accuracy of component positioning and patient-reported outcomes. The learning curve of RATKA for operating time was between 7 and 11 cases. Future well-powered studies on RATKAs should report on the knee alignment and balancing techniques utilised to enable better comparisons on which techniques maximise patient outcomes.Level of evidence III.

Clinical and radiological outcomes of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Early lessons from the first 100 consecutive knees in 85 patients

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is associated with improved component positioning and comparable short- and mid-term implant survivorship with manual UKA. This study aims to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes following robotic-assisted UKA as well as any potential learning-curves associated with the introduction of such new technology.

METHODS

Prospective study of patients undergoing robotic-assisted UKA. Outcome measures were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Knee Society Score (KSS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS), complications, implant survivorship, component positioning and learning curve.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients comprising 100 knees were recruited and followed up for 21.0 ± 4.3 months. At two years, there were significant and sustained improvements in PROMs and 100% implant survivorship rate. A high degree of implant accuracy was achieved with the robotic system. A cumulative learning curve of 20 cases was noted.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted UKA achieves excellent implant accuracy and clinical outcomes in the short-term. Long-term follow up is needed to evaluate this relationship.

Total Knee Arthroplasty Hospital Costs by Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing: Robotic vs Conventional

Background

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) represents a major national health expenditure. The last decade has seen a surge in robotic-assisted TKA (roTKA); however, literature on the costs of roTKA as compared to conventional TKA (cTKA) is limited. The purpose of this study was to assess the costs associated with roTKA as compared to cTKA.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort cost-analysis study of patients undergoing primary, elective roTKA or cTKA from July 2020 to March 2021. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) was used to determine granular costs. Patient demographics, medical/surgical details, and costs were compared.

Results

A total of 2058 TKAs were analyzed (1795 cTKAs and 263 roTKAs). roTKA patients were more often male (50.2% vs 42.3%; P = .016), and discharged home (98.5% vs 93.7%; P = .017), and had longer operating room (OR) time (144.6 vs 130.9 minutes; P < .0001), and lower length of stay (LOS) (1.8 vs 2.1 days; P < .0001). roTKA costs were 2.17× greater for supplies excluding implant (P < .0001), 1.18× for total supplies (P < .0001), 1.12× for OR personnel (P < .0001), and 1.05× for total personnel (P = .0001). Implant costs were similar (P = .076), but 0.98× cheaper for post-anesthesia care unit personnel (P = .018) and 0.84× for inpatient personnel (P < .0001). Overall hospital costs for roTKA were 1.10× more than cTKA (P < .0001).

Conclusion

roTKA had higher total hospital costs than cTKA. Despite a lower LOS, the longer OR time with higher supply and personnel costs resulted in a costlier procedure. Understanding the costs of roTKA is essential when considering the value (ie, outcomes per dollars spent) of this modern technology.

Patient expectations and satisfaction in robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a prospective two-year outcome study

INTRODUCTION

The impact of fulfillment of patient expectations throughout recovery on satisfaction in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is not well understood. Utilizing a standardized TKA method with a robotically assisted (RA) platform, we investigated the impact of expectation fulfillment at 3-month (M) and 6-M on 1-year (Y) and 2-Y satisfaction. We hypothesize that early fulfillment of patient expectations is associated with improved midterm patient satisfaction. We also compare improvements in outcomes with RA-TKA to those of a recent large national TKA cohort study to determine whether RA-TKA meets or exceeds the current standard of care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred six patients were prospectively enrolled and underwent robotic-assisted TKA by a single surgeon using the OMNIBotics system. Patients completed KOOS and New Knee Society Score (KSS) preoperatively and at 3M, 6M, 1Y, and 2Y postoperatively. Expectation fulfillment was subdivided into patients who were below or above the average expectation score pre-operatively, or fulfillment of expectation score at 3M and 6M post TKA. The satisfaction of each group was then compared at 1Y and 2Y post TKA. Study cohort outcomes were compared to contemporary literature from the Function and Outcomes Research for Comparative Effectiveness in Total Joint Replacement (FORCE-TJR) database.

RESULTS

Patients with greater than average KSS expectation fulfillment at 3M reported significantly higher KSS satisfaction scores at 1Y (34.9 ± 5.3 vs 30.6 ± 6.7, p = 0.0012), and patients with greater than average 6M expectation fulfillment reported improved satisfaction at 1Y (33.9 ± 5.9 vs 31.1 ± 6.7, p = 0.0330) and 2Y (35.2 ± 4.8 vs 32.4 ± 6.8, p = 0.0323). When compared to the FORCE-TJR database, no significant differences in post-operative KOOS outcomes were observed except for Sports and Recreation, for which the RAS group demonstrated higher scores (65.5 ± 30.0 vs 53.0 ± 27.1 p < 0.0001); however, the study cohort reported significantly greater improvements in KOOS Pain, Symptoms, Sports and Recreation, and Quality of Life at multiple time points up to 2 years post TKA.

CONCLUSION

High early-expectation fulfillment was associated with improved satisfaction at 1Y and 2Y, indicating the importance of managing patient-specific post-operative care to ensure patients reach their pre-operative goals. Greater improvements in all KOOS sub-scores and in absolute Sports and Recreation at 1Y and 2Y were observed in this robotic-assisted cohort compared to a large contemporary database, indicating that RAS meets or exceeds current standard of care benchmarks for patient-reported outcomes.

Robotics in orthopaedic surgery: why, what and how?

INTRODUCTION

Robotics applied to orthopedics has become an interesting topic both from the surgical point of view and the engineering one. The main goal of those systems is the enhancement of joint arthroplasty surgery, providing the robotic support to precisely and accurately prepare the bone, restore the limb alignment and the physiological kinematics of the joint. Various robotic systems are currently available on the market, each addressing specific kind of surgeries and characterized by a series of specific features that may involve different requirements and/or modus operandi.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An overview of these devices was performed, addressing the different categories in which robots are subdivided in terms of: operations performed, requirements and level of interaction of the surgeon. The main models currently available on the market were addressed and relative studies in the literature were reported and compared, to highlight the benefits and drawbacks of the different technologies.

RESULTS

The different robotic systems were subdivided in: open/closed platform, image-based/imageless and active/passive/semi-active. Regardless of the typology of robotic system, the main aim is to improve precision and accuracy of the operation. It is to be noted that, regardless of the typology of robotic system, the surgeon is still in charge of the planning and approval of the operation: only the precise and consistent execution of his directives is entrusted to the robot. The positive factors have however to be weighed against the fact that robotic systems involve an important initial investment and most of the times require the surgeons and the staff to learn how to operate them (with a learning curve differing from system to system).

CONCLUSIONS

Each surgeon, when considering if and which robotic system to adopt, has to properly evaluate the different benefits and drawbacks involved to find the surgical robot that fits his needs the best.