How Large a Study Is Needed to Detect TKA Revision Rate Reductions Attributable to Robotic or Navigated Technologies? A Simulation-based Power Analysis

Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty in Obese Patients

Background

Robotic-assisted systems have gained popularity in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate operative characteristics and radiographic outcomes of obese patients undergoing robotic-assisted TKA.

Methods

A retrospective review of consecutive cases performed by a single surgeon was performed from January 1, 2016, to January 31, 2022. Adult patients with body mass index ≥35 kg/m2 who underwent primary TKA using a computed tomography-assisted robotic system were compared to patients who underwent primary TKA using conventional instrumentation. Demographics, preoperative and postoperative radiographic measurements, and intraoperative outcomes were compared between cohorts. In total, 119 patients were identified, 60 in the robotic-assisted cohort and 59 in the conventional instrumentation cohort.

Results

Age, body mass index, and estimated blood loss were not significantly different between the cohorts. The robotic-assisted cohort experienced longer tourniquet times (93.3 vs 75.5 minutes, P < .001). Preoperative hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) was similar between the robotic-assisted and conventional cohorts (8.4° ± 4.9° vs 9.3° ± 5.3°, P = .335). Postoperative HKA was 2.0° ± 1.4° in the robotic-assisted group and 3.1° ± 3.23° in the conventional group (P = .040). The proportion of patients with postoperative HKA > 3° of varus or valgus was 9 of 60 (15.0%) in the robotic-assisted cohort compared to 18 of 59 (30.5%) using conventional instrumentation (P = .043).

Conclusions

Obese patients treated with robotic-assisted TKA had postoperative alignment closer to neutral and fewer postoperative radiographic outliers than patients treated with conventional instrumentation. The results of this study support use of robotic-assisted technologies in TKA, particularly in obese patients.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Conventional Versus Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty

This study aims to compare the outcomes and advantages of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed using conventional surgical techniques with those conducted using robotic-assisted methods in terms of operation time, Oxford knee score, range of motion, tourniquet time, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis index. We performed a literature search through five databases, namely, PubMed, Cochrane Central, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science, from inception until July 3, 2023. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohorts comparing conventional TKA with robotic-assisted TKA were included. The risk of bias of the included RCTs was determined using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the National Institutes of Health tool for cohort studies. We conducted a meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.4. To analyze continuous data, we calculated the mean difference (MD) along with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). By synthesizing data from a comprehensive analysis, the study unveiled noteworthy distinctions between robotic-assisted arthroplasty and conventional arthroplasty across critical parameters. First, a substantial alteration in the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle was observed, with the robotic-assisted approach demonstrating a significant difference (MD = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.25-1.43, p = 0.005). Second, in terms of operative time, a notable reduction in surgical duration was noted with conventional TKA (MD = 16.85, 95% CI = 8.08-25.63, p = 0.0002). The assessment of tourniquet time exhibited a significantly longer duration for robotic-assisted arthroplasty (MD = 35.70, 95% CI = 27.80-43.61, p < 0.001). Our findings indicate that conventional TKA outperforms robotic-assisted TKA, primarily due to its shorter operative and tourniquet times, along with a more favorable change in the HKA angle. However, it is worth noting that robotic-assisted TKA showed a slight advantage in pain outcomes, although this advantage was not statistically significant. To gain a more comprehensive understanding, we recommend conducting a large-scale randomized controlled trial that directly compares both TKA methods. This trial should evaluate costs and long-term outcomes while ensuring consistent follow-up durations among studies. Such an approach would greatly assist orthopedic decision-making and contribute to improved TKA outcomes.

Status of robot-assisted artificial total joint arthroplasty in China: a cross-sectional survey of joint surgeons

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to report on the use of Robotic-assisted total joint arthroplasty (RA-TJA) in China as well as the experience and expectations of Chinese doctors regarding this technology.

METHOD

A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the current status of RA-TJA in China, the practical experience and suggestions for improvement of the technology by joint surgeons who have performed RA-TJA, and the interest and expectations of orthopaedic surgeons who have not used RA-TJA. The questionnaire was administered to all the physicians of the Chinese Association of Orthopedic Surgeons (CAOS).

RESULT

A total of 372 qualified questionnaires were generated, among which 28% (n = 104) of the respondents had performed RA-TJA, among those who had performed RA-TJA. When asked how helpful the joint replacement robot was actually/expected to be, there was no significant difference between the expected and actual experience of nonusers and users (p ≥ 0.05); the biggest disadvantage of the current development of RA-TJA was perceived as additional charges to the patient by those who had used it, while those who had not used it perceived it as a limitation of their hospital, both of which were significant differences. Most respondents in both groups (used: 94.2%; not used: 91.4%) were confident in the clinical development of the joint replacement robot.

CONCLUSION

This survey provides cross-sectional data on the current status of Chinese joint surgeons using or not using robots in their daily clinical practice. Improving surgical precision was the consensus of most respondents, while high surgical costs and limitations of hospital conditions were barriers to its development in China.

A randomized controlled trial comparing two-year postoperative femoral and tibial migration of a new and an established cementless rotating platform total knee arthroplasty

AIMS

The primary aim of this study was to compare the migration of the femoral and tibial components of the cementless rotating platform Attune and Low Contact Stress (LCS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs, two years postoperatively, using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) in order to assess the risk of the development of aseptic loosening. A secondary aim was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between the designs.

METHODS

A total of 61 TKAs were analyzed in this randomized clinical RSA trial. RSA examinations were performed one day and three, six, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The maximal total point motion (MPTM), translations, and rotations of the components were analyzed. PROMs and clinical data were collected preoperatively and at six weeks and three, six, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Linear mixed effect modelling was used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

The mean MTPM two years postoperatively (95% confidence interval (CI)) of the Attune femoral component (0.92 mm (0.75 to 1.11)) differed significantly from that of the LCS TKA (1.72 mm (1.47 to 2.00), p < 0.001). The Attune femoral component subsided, tilted (anteroposteriorly), and rotated (internal-external) significantly less. The mean tibial MTPM two years postoperatively did not differ significantly, being 1.11 mm (0.94 to 1.30) and 1.17 mm (0.99 to 1.36, p = 0.447) for the Attune and LCS components, respectively. The rate of migration in the second postoperative year was negligible for the femoral and tibial components of both designs. The mean pain-at-rest (numerical rating scale (NRS)-rest) in the Attune group was significantly less compared with that in the LCS group during the entire follow-up period. At three months postoperatively, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Physical Function Shortform score, the Oxford Knee Score, and the NRS-activity scores were significantly better in the Attune group.

CONCLUSION

The mean MTPM of the femoral components of the cementless rotating platform Attune was significantly less compared with that of the LCS design. This was reflected mainly in significantly less subsidence, posterior tilting, and internal rotation. The mean tibial MTPMs were not significantly different. During the second postoperative year, the components of both designs stabilized and low risks for the development of aseptic loosening are expected.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(2):148-157.

The Reverse Fragility Index: Interpreting the Current Literature on Long-Term Survivorship of Computer-Navigated Versus Conventional TKA: A Systematic Review and Cross-Sectional Study of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Despite the most recent American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons clinical practice guideline making a "strong" recommendation against the use of intraoperative navigation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), its use is increasing. We utilized the concept of the reverse fragility index (RFI) to assess the strength of neutrality of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the long-term survivorship of computer-navigated and conventional TKA.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed including all RCTs through August 3, 2021, comparing the long-term outcomes of computer-navigated and conventional TKA. Randomized trials with mean follow-up of >8 years and survivorship with revision as the end point were included. The RFI quantifies the strength of a study's neutrality by calculating the minimum number of events necessary to flip the result from nonsignificant to significant. The RFI at a threshold of p < 0.05 was calculated for each study reporting nonsignificant results. The reverse fragility quotient (RFQ) was calculated by dividing the RFI by the study sample size.

RESULTS

Ten clinical trials with 2,518 patients and 38 all-cause revisions were analyzed. All 10 studies reported nonsignificant results. The median RFI at the p < 0.05 threshold was 4, meaning that a median of 4 events would be needed to change the results from nonsignificant to significant. The median RFQ was 0.029, indicating that the nonsignificance of the results was contingent on only 2.9 events per 100 participants. The median loss to follow-up was 27 patients. In all studies, the number of patients lost to follow-up was greater than the RFI.

CONCLUSIONS

The equipoise in long-term survivorship between computer-navigated and conventional TKA rests on fragile studies, as their statistical nonsignificance could be reversed by changing the outcome status of only a handful of patients--a number that was always smaller than the number lost to follow-up. Routine reporting of the RFI in trials with nonsignificant findings may provide readers with a measure of confidence in the neutrality of the results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparative efficacy of the different cutting guides in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A systematic-review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several cutting guides including conventional, navigation, patient specific instrumentation (PSI) and robotic are currently used in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the most widely used cutting guides regarding the improvement of radiological, functional outcomes and the rate of complications.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing UKA cutting guides were searched in electronic databases, major orthopaedics journals, and oral communications in major orthopaedics meetings, until May 1st, 2022. The primary outcomes were the rate of outliers for the tibial and femoral components in the frontal plane, KSS score and the complication rate.

RESULTS

Eighteen RCTs involving 1562 patients with 1564 UKA were included Regarding the prosthetic components' positions, we found a significant increase of the outliers rate using PSI for the femoral component, compared to robotic surgery (risk ratio 0.00 [95% CI 0.00 to 0.55]) and navigated surgery (risk ratio 305.1 [95% CI 1.50 to 1,27e + 07]). We didn't emphasize any difference regarding the tibial component's position, the KSS value at 24 months postoperatively, and the complication rate. Regarding secondary outcomes, robotics provided a better precision in bone cuts in the sagittal plane for the tibial component and the lower limb alignment. No other differences were observed.

CONCLUSION

In the light of these results, the robot seems to be the most precise cutting instrument to perform UKA. However, this did not demonstrate any difference in functional or clinical outcome. The cost of this technology can be a major economic brake, especially in surgical centers that do not have an exclusive prosthetic activity. Further outcome and survivorship data is needed to recommend one cutting instrument over the other.

Can Technology Assistance be Cost Effective in TKA? A Simulation-Based Analysis of a Risk-prioritized, Practice-specific Framework

BACKGROUND

Robotic, navigated, and patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) TKA procedures have been introduced to improve component placement precision and improve implant survivorship and other clinical outcomes. However, the best available evidence has shown that these technologies are ineffective in reducing revision rates in the general TKA patient population. Nonetheless, it seems plausible that these technologies could be an effective and cost-effective means of reducing revision risk in clinical populations that are at an elevated risk of revision because of patient-specific demographics (such as older age at index surgery, elevated BMI, and being a man). Since clinical trials on this topic would need to be very large, a simulation approach could provide insight on which clinical populations would be the most promising for analysis.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We conducted a simulation-based analysis and asked: (1) Given key demographic parameters characterizing a patient population, together with estimates of the precision achievable with selected forms of technology assistance in TKA, can we estimate the expected distributions of anticipated reductions in lifetime revision risk for that population and the associated improvements in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) that would be expected to result? (2) Are there realistic practice characteristics (such as combinations of local patient demographics and capital and per-procedure costs) for which applying a per-patient risk-prioritized policy for using technology-assisted TKA could be considered cost-effective based on projected cost savings from reductions in revision rates?

METHODS

We designed simulations of hypothetical practice-specific clinical scenarios, each characterized by patient volume, patient demographics, and technology-assisted surgical technique, using demographic information drawn from other studies to characterize two contrasting simulated clinical scenarios in which the distributions of factors describing patients undergoing TKA place one population at a comparatively elevated risk of revision (elevated-risk population) and the second at a comparatively reduced risk of revision (lower-risk population). We used results from previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses to estimate the implant precision in coronal plane alignment for patient-specific instrumentation, navigated, and robotic technology. We generated simulated TKA patient populations based on risk estimates from large clinical studies, structured reviews, and meta-analyses and calculated the patient-specific reduction in the revision risk and the change in QALYs attributable to the technology-assisted intervention in each of the two simulated clinical scenarios. We also incorporated a sensitivity analysis, incorporating variations in the effect size of deviations from overall coronal alignment on revision risk and difference in health state utilities acquired through a structured review process. We then simulated the outcomes of 25,000 operations per patient using the precisions associated with the conventional TKA technique, the three technology-assisted techniques, and a hypothetical technology-assisted intervention that could consistently deliver perfectly neutral overall coronal alignment, which is unachievable in practice. A risk-prioritized treatment policy was emulated by ordering the simulated patients from the highest to lowest predicted increase in QALYs, such that simulated patients who would see the greatest increase in the QALYs (and therefore the greatest reduction in lifetime revision risk) were the patients to receive technology-assisted TKA intervention in a practice. We used cost estimates acquired through a structured review process and calculated the net added costs of each of the three technology-assisted techniques as a function of the percent utilization (proportion of patients treated with technology assistance in a practice), factoring in fixed costs, per-procedure variable costs, and savings occurring from the prevention of future revision surgery. Finally, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and marginal cost-effectiveness ratio (MCER) for each technology-assisted technique for the two clinical scenarios. We then used a Monte Carlo approach to simulate variations in key patient risk, health state, and economic factors as well as to obtain a distribution of estimates for cost-effectiveness. We considered an intervention to be cost effective if either the ICER or MCER values were below USD/QALY 63,000.

RESULTS

For the lower-risk population, the median reduction in the revision risk was 0.9% (0.4% to 2.2%, extrema from the sensitivity analysis) and 1.8% (0.9% to 4.4%) for PSI and robotic TKA, respectively, and 1.9% (1.0% to 4.6%) for ideal TKA. In contrast, the median reduction in the revision risk in the elevated-risk clinical scenario was 2.0% (1.2% to 3.4%) and 4.6% (2.7% to 8.5%) for PSI and robotic TKA and 5.1% (3.0% to 9.4%) for ideal TKA. Estimated differences in the cumulative gain in QALYs attributable to technology-assisted TKA ranged from 0.6 (0.2 to 1.8) to 4.0 (1.8 to 10.0) QALYs per 100 patients, depending on the intervention type and clinical scenario. For PSI, we found treating 15% of patients in the lower-risk population and 77% in the elevated-risk population could meet the threshold for being considered cost effective. For navigated TKA systems offering high alignment precision, we found the intervention could meet this threshold for practice sizes of at least 300 patients per year and a percent utilization of 27% in the lower-risk population. In the elevated-risk population, cost-effectiveness could be achieved in practice volumes as small as 100 patients per year with a percent utilization of at least 6%, and cost savings could be achieved with a percent utilization of at least 45%. We found that robotic TKA could only meet the threshold for being considered cost-effectiveness in the lower-risk population if yearly patient volumes exceeded 600 and for a limited range of percent utilization (27% to 32%). However, in the elevated-risk patient population, robotic TKA with high alignment precision could potentially be cost effective for practice sizes as small as 100 patients per year and a percent utilization of at least 20% if a risk-prioritized treatment protocol were used.

CONCLUSION

Based on these simulations, a selective-use policy for technology-assisted TKA that prioritizes using technology assistance for those patients at a higher risk of revision based on patient-specific factors could potentially meet the cost-effectiveness threshold in selected circumstances (for example, primarily in elevated-risk populations and larger practice sizes). Whether it does meet that threshold would depend significantly on the surgical precision that can be achieved in practice for a given proposed technology as well as on the true local costs of using the proposed technology. We further recommend that any future randomized trials seeking to demonstrate possible effects of technology assistance on revision risk focus on clinical populations that are at higher risk of revision (such as, patient populations that are relatively younger, have higher BMIs, and higher proportions of men).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study suggests that technology assistance is only likely to prove cost effective in selected circumstances rather than in all clinical populations and practice settings. In general, we project that surgical navigation is most likely to prove cost effective in the widest range of circumstances, that PSI may be cost effective or cost neutral in a moderate range of circumstances, and that robotic surgery is only likely to be cost effective in moderately large practices containing patients who are on average at an intrinsically elevated risk of revision.

Computer-Navigated and Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: Increasing in Popularity Without Increasing Complications

BACKGROUND

Data on the clinical impact of computer navigation (CN) and robotic assistance (RA) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are mixed. This study aims to describe modern utilization trends in CN-TKA, RA-TKA, and traditionally-instrumented (TD) TKA and to assess for differences in postoperative complications and opioid consumption by procedure type.

METHODS

A national database was queried to identify primary, elective TKA patients from 2015 to 2020. Trends in procedural utilization rates were assessed. Differences in 90-day postoperative complications and inpatient opioid consumption were assessed. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to account for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of the 847,496 patients included, 49,317 (5.82%) and 24,460 (2.89%) underwent CN-TKA and RA-TKA, respectively. CN-TKA utilization increased from 5.64% (2015) to 6.41% (2020) and RA-TKA utilization increased from 0.84% (2015) to 5.89% (2020). After adjusting for confounders, CN-TKA was associated with lower periprosthetic joint infection (P = .001), pulmonary embolism (P < .001), and acute respiratory failure (P = .015) risk compared to traditional (TD) TKA. RA-TKA was associated with lower deep vein thrombosis (P < .001), myocardial infarction (P = .013), and pulmonary embolism (P = .001) risk than TD-TKA. Lower postoperative day 1 opioid usage was seen with CN-TKA and RA-TKA than TD-TKA (P < .001). Lower postoperative day 0 opioid consumption was also seen in RA-TKA (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

From 2015 to 2020, there was a relative 13.7% and 601.2% increase in CN-TKAs and RA-TKAs, respectively. This trend was associated with reductions in hospitalization duration, postoperative complications, and opioid consumption. These data support the safety of RA-TKA and CN-TKA compared to TD-TKA. Further investigation into the specific indications for these technology-assisted TKAs is warranted.

A systematic review on the cost-effectiveness of the computer-assisted orthopedic system

Computer-assisted orthopedic system (CAOS) is rapidly gaining popularity in the field of precision medicine. However, the cost-effectiveness of CAOS has not been well clarified. We performed this review to summarize and assess the cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) with regard to CAOS. Publications on CEA in CAOS have been searched in PubMed and CEA Registry up to May 31, 2022. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used to estimate the quality of studies. Relationships between qualities and potential factors were also examined. There were 15 eligible studies in the present review. Twelve studies evaluated CAOS joint arthroplasties and found that CAOS joint arthroplasties were cost-effective compared to manual methods. Three studies focused on spinal surgery, two of which analyzed the cost-effectiveness of CAOS for patients after spinal fusion, with conflicting results. One study demonstrated that CAOS was cost-effective in spinal pedicle screw insertion. The mean QHES score of CEAs included was 86.1. The potential factors had no significant relationship with the quality of studies. Based on available studies, our review reflected that CAOS was cost-effective in the field of joint arthroplasty. While in spinal surgery, the answer was unclear. Current CEAs represent high qualities, and more CEAs are required in the different disciplines of orthopedics where CAOS is employed.

Status and future of modern technologies in arthroplasty : Results of a survey of the German Society for Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery (DGOU)

BACKGROUND

The orthopedic community is divided on the question of whether modern technologies in arthroplasty improve outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this initiative of the working group on intraoperative imaging and technology integration (Arbeitsgemeinschaft intraoperative Bildgebung und Technologieintegration, AGiTEC) is to initiate the collection of additional data for the scientific evaluation of modern technologies.

QUESTION

To what extent are modern technologies currently used and which implementations are planned? Do the members of the German Society for Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery (DGOU) consider the acquisition of additional data for scientific assessment necessary?

METHODS

Members of the DGOU were asked via an e‑mail survey about the distribution and projected introduction of modern technologies in arthroplasty. They were also asked whether sufficient data were collected for scientific evaluation and whether acquisition of additional data in studies or arthroplasty registries were considered necessary.

RESULTS

Of the 7923 probands surveyed, 428 completed the questionnaire in full (5.4%). It was found that individual implants and navigation are currently the most frequently used (31% and 29%, respectively). The largest increases in the next 2 years are projected for virtual reality and robotics (+30% and +23%, respectively), 85% of respondents indicated that insufficient data were collected for scientific evaluation, and 89% each requested initiation of multicenter studies and inclusion of technologies in the arthroplasty registry.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study should motivate the scientific community, industry, and those responsible for the arthroplasty registries to collect and analyze data for the scientific assessment of modern technologies.

Robotics versus personalized 3D preoperative planning in total knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched analysis

Purpose

Lower limb alignment is crucial in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Previous studies have shown that robotics and personalized three-dimensional (3D) preoperative planning could improve postoperative alignment accuracy compared with conventional TKA, but comparison between the above two techniques has never been reported. The authors hypothesized that robotics may be superior to personalized 3D preoperative planning in terms of postoperative alignment in primary TKA, with similar patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) but higher cost and longer operative time.

Methods

A consecutive series of patients who received TKA in our center from September 2020 to January 2021 were enrolled retrospectively. After 1:2 matching, 52 and 104 patients were included and divided into study group for robotics and control group for personalized 3D preoperative planning, respectively. Multiple postoperative alignment angles were measured, and clinical features such as operation and tourniquet time, length of hospital stay and hemoglobin (Hb) were recorded. Knee Society Score (KSS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were used to evaluate clinical results.

Results

Compared with control group, robotics group had significantly lower frontal femoral component angle (FFC) and frontal tibial component angle (FTC) absolute deviation (P < 0.05). It also had less outliers in hip–knee–ankle angle (HKA), FTC, lateral femoral component angle (LFC) and lateral tibial component angle (LTC) (P < 0.05). Hb loss of robotics group was significantly lower than control group (P < 0.001), while the operation and tourniquet time were longer (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in KSS and WOMAC scores between two groups.

Conclusion

Compared with control group, patients in robotics group had significantly less malalignment, malposition, Hb loss, but similar PROMs. The operations in robotics group spent longer operation time and cost more compared with control group.

Trial registration: The Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000036235. Registered 22 August 2020, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=59300.

Level of evidence

III.

HURWA robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty improves component positioning and alignment – A prospective randomized and multicenter study

Background

The objective of this study was to compare the radiologic and clinical outcomes of HURWA robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to those of conventional TKA.

Methods

A total of 150 patients were randomized into two groups – 73 and 77 patients underwent robotic-assisted TKA and conventional TKA, respectively. Preoperative and postoperative Western Ontario McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) score, Knee Society Score (KSS) and range of motion (ROM) were obtained and compared between these two groups. The preoperative and postoperative hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle and the rate of HKA≤3° in the two groups were also compared.

Results

The postoperative mean HKA angle was 1.801° ​± ​1.608° of varus for the robotic-assisted TKA group and 3.017° ​± ​2.735° of varus for the conventional TKA group; these values were significantly different. The alignment rate for mechanical axis lower than 3° in the robotic-assisted TKA group and the conventional TKA group were 81.2% and 63.5%, respectively. Patients undergone robotic-assisted TKA or conventional TKA had similarly improved knee flexion and functional recovery reflected by WOMAC score, HSS score, SF-36 score and KSS.

Conclusion

HURWA robotic-assisted TKA is a safe and effective, resulting in better alignment for mechanical axis than conventional TKA. The improvement in knee flexion and functional recovery after HURWA robotic-assisted TKA were similar to those after conventional TKA. However, longer follow-up is needed to determine whether the improved alignment of mechanical axis will produce better long-term clinical outcomes.

The translational potential of this article

Recently, the robotic-assisted TKA system has been introduced to clinical practice for TKA. Several robotic-assisted TKA systems, including CASPAR, Tsolution, ROSA, ROBODOC and Mako, have been implemented into clinical application.However, the clinical application of these robotic systems was limited due to their technical complexity, insufficient versatility and increased operative time. Until now, there are still no robotic-assisted TKA systems approved by the National Medical Products Administration of China. Therefore, more robotic-assisted TKA systems need to be designed and improved, particularly in China. Through our randomized, multicenter, single blind and parallel controlled trial, we showed that HURWA robot-assisted TKA system is a safe and effective system for TKA, which had improved knee flexion.