Barberis L, Sabatini L, Pellegrino A, Galletta C, Risitano S, Capella M, Massè A, Schiraldi M, Indelli PF. Bi-cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty is here to stay: A consecutive series transitioning from manual instrumentation to enabling technologies.
Technol Health Care 2024:THC231608. [PMID:
38607775 DOI:
10.3233/thc-231608]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/14/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Bicruciate-retaining (BCR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has seen renewed interest due to the potential for more natural knee kinematics with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) retention.
OBJECTIVE
The present study attempts to determine differences in the 2-year survivorship and patient-reported outcomes between two surgical strategies (traditional instrumentation versus robotics) applied to the extensive use of a modern, 2nd generation BCR TKA design.
METHODS
We performed a retrospective study with prospectively collected data of 113 patients who underwent primary TKA between 2018 and 2020 using a 2nd generation BCR TKA implant. Patient demographics, PROMS, and intra/post-operative complications were collected. Patients were also evaluated according to the use or not of robotics. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate revision-free survival at follow up.
RESULTS
102 patients were enrolled: 90 received traditional surgery and 12 robotic-assisted surgery. The mean age was 68 years (SD 7.76) with an average BMI of 29.6 kg/m2 (SD 3.56). The mean follow up (FU) was 32.4 ± 6.2 months (range 24-45 months). Survivorship at 2 years was 98% (95% CI: 92.4-99.5). Revisions/reoperations were performed for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear (1/4), pain (1/4), arthrofibrosis (1/4) and acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (1/4). At final FU, 92 patients (90.2%) considered themselves satisfied, showing a mean OKS of 40.6 (SD 5.1) and a mean FKS of 76.7 (SD 11.8). No differences in the outcome were found between traditional and robotic-assisted procedures.
CONCLUSION
The modern BCR design evaluated in this study achieved excellent results in terms of implant survivorship, low rate of reoperation and clinical results, independently from the use of enabling technologies.
Collapse