Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty with a Cruciate-Retaining Implant: A 10-Year Follow-up Study

Robotics in total knee replacement: Current use and future implications

Robotic total knee replacement (TKR) surgery has evolved over the years with the aim of improving the overall 80% satisfaction rate associated with TKR surgery. Proponents claim higher precision in executing the pre-operative plan which results in improved alignment and possibly better clinical outcomes. Opponents suggest longer operative times with potentially higher complications and no superiority in clinical outcomes alongside increased costs. This editorial will summarize where we currently stand and the future implications of using robotics in knee replacement surgery.

The ROSA robotic-arm system reliably restores joint line height, patella height and posterior condylar offset in total knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

There is growing interest in the use of robotic TKA to improve accuracy of component positioning in Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of implant component position using the ROSA® knee system with specific reference to Joint Line Height, Patella Height and Posterior Condylar Offset (PCO).

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of a prospectively-maintained database of the initial 100 consecutive TKAs performed by a high volume surgeon using the ROSA® knee system. Both the image-based and imageless workflow were used and two prosthesis types were implanted. To determine the accuracy of component positioning, the immediate post-operative radiograph was reviewed and compared with the immediate pre-operative radiograph with regards to Joint Line Height, Patella Height and Posterior Condylar Offset.

RESULTS

100 consecutive patients undergoing TKA using the ROSA system were included; mean age 70 years (range 49-95 years). Mean change in joint line height was 0.2 mm, patella height (Insall-Salvati ratio) 0.01 and posterior condylar offset 0.02 mm; there was no statistically significant difference between the pre and post-operative values. No difference was demonstrated between image-based or imageless workflows, or between implant design (Persona versus Vanguard) regarding joint line height, patella height and PCO.

CONCLUSION

This study validates the use of the ROSA® knee system in accurately restoring Joint Line Height, Patella Height and Posterior Condylar Offset in TKA surgery. No significant differences were found between imageless and image-based groups, or between implant designs (Persona versus Vanguard).

Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty Surgeon Marketing: Do Claims Align With the Literature?

Background

Robotic total knee arthroplasty (R-TKA) utilization and marketing continue to rise. We examined the marketing on surgeon websites regarding R-TKA benefits and sought to determine if the claims were supported by existing literature.

Methods

A Google search identified 10 physician websites from each of the 5 largest U.S. markets by population with the term "robotic total knee arthroplasty city, state." Claims on websites about R-TKA were categorized. Literature from 2012-2022 was reviewed for data "for" or "against" each claim. Level of evidence for each publication was collected.

Results

Fifty websites were captured that included 59 surgeons. A specific R-TKA platform was mentioned on 68% of websites. Website claims about robotics were placed into 8 major categories. Literature review supported the claims of more precise/accurate, reduced injury to tissue, and less pain with more literature "for" than "against" the claims.

Conclusions

Claims made on physician websites regarding the benefits of R-TKA are variable and not definitively supported by existing literature. Most available data can be categorized into levels of evidence III, IV, and V. There is a paucity of level I evidence to support the various marketing statements. Physicians should be cognizant of both the claims made on their websites and the literature that could be used to support or refute those specific claims.

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.

Outcomes following robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

This study elaborates on previous research to compare length of stay, complication rates, and total cost between patients undergoing robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and conventional total knee arthroplasty (cTKA). We hypothesized that patients undergoing rTKA would have reduced length of stay, lower complication rates, improved perioperative outcomes, and higher total healthcare costs than those undergoing cTKA.

METHODS

Data were collected from the National Inpatient Sample Database Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project between the years 2016-2019. Patients undergoing rTKA and cTKA were identified under International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision codes (ICD-10-CM/PCS). Length of stay, specific complications, and total costs were examined at time point. SPSS (v 27.0 8, IBM Corp. Armonk, NY) was utilized to compare demographic and analytical statistics between rTKA and cTKA. rTKA and cTKA were compared both before and after propensity matching.

RESULTS

17,249 rTKA (3.09%) and 541,122 cTKA (96.91%) were included. Compared to cTKA patients, rTKA patients had reduced average length of stay of 1.91 days (p < 0.001), higher average total cost of $67133.34 (p < 0.001), reduced periprosthetic infection (OR = 0.027, p < 0.001), periprosthetic dislocation (OR = 0.117, p < 0.001), periprosthetic mechanical complication (OR = 0.315, p < 0.001), pulmonary embolism (OR = 0.358, p < 0.001), transfusion (OR = 0.366, p < 0.001), pneumonia (OR = 0.468, p = 0.002), deep vein thrombosis (OR = 0.479, p = 0.001), and blood loss anemia (OR = 0.728, p < 0.001). These differences remained statistically significant even after propensity matching.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports our hypothesis that rTKA is associated with fewer complications, but higher average total cost than cTKA. Our study shows that rTKA can be safely performed in older and sicker patients. Future studies assessing the impacts of these findings on patient reported outcomes would provide further insight into the benefits of rTKA. Furthermore, identifying patient specific factors that place them at risk for increased complications with cTKA as opposed to rTKA could provide surgeons insight on the method of TKA that maximizes patient outcomes while minimizing healthcare cost.

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.

Measuring Parallelism to the Ground in Bipedal Stance Phase: Mechanical Versus Kinematic Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Introduction The goal of total knee arthroplasty is to replace diseased cartilage and bone with an artificial implant to improve the patient's quality of life. The knee has historically been reconstructed to the patient's mechanical axis (MA). However, kinematically aligned techniques have been increasingly used. Kinematic alignment requires less soft-tissue resection and aligns the knee with what is anatomically natural to the patient, while there is concern that kinematically aligned knees will lead to earlier failure due to potential unequal weight distribution on the implant. The purpose of this study is to compare the parallelism from the floor of the joint-line cuts using kinematic and mechanical alignment and understand if the MA is a proper estimation of the tibial-ankle axis (TA). Methods A retrospective study was conducted by recruiting all high tibial osteotomy and distal femoral osteotomy recipients operated on by two surgeons in two MedStar Health hospitals from 01/2013 to 07/2020 with full-length films in preparation for restorative procedures. Baseline osteoarthritis was graded using the Kellgren-Lawrence classification system with all patients presenting as Grade 0. The TA and the joint-line orientations of the MA and kinematic axis (KA) were measured on 66 legs. The average distance from parallelism to the ground was compared between the MA and the KA and between the MA and the TA using a paired t-test. Results KA joint-line orientation (1.705° deviation) was more parallel to the floor in the bipedal stance phase than the MA (2.316° deviation, p=0.0156). The MA (2.316° deviation) was not a proper estimation of the TA (4.278° deviation, p=0.0001). Conclusion By utilizing the KA technique, the restoration of the natural joint line, as well as a joint that is more parallel to the floor in the stance phase compared to the MA, is achieved. The parallelism to the ground of the KA during the bipedal stance phase suggests an even load distribution across the knee. In addition, due to its similarity to the KA and anatomical significance in weight-bearing distribution, further investigation into the hip-to-calcaneal axis as an approximation of the joint line is warranted.

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.

Long-term clinical and radiological outcome of a cementless titanium-coated total knee arthroplasty system

INTRODUCTION

To ensure a high-quality standard, it is important to frequently evaluate different prostheses models to avoid prostheses with high failure rates. Thus, the aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of the uncemented titanium-coated total knee arthroplasty (TKA) system (Advanced Coated System (ACS) III, Implantcast, GERMANY). We hypothesized that the ACS III would have a similar performance as other cemented TKA systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 540 ACS III mobile-bearing knee joint prostheses were implanted in 495 patients. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Tegner activity score (TAS), knee society score (KSS), Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) score, and the Short Form 12 (SF-12) score for the evaluation of quality of life (QoL) were taken after at least 9 years of follow-up. In addition, we measured range of motion (ROM) and assessed potential sex differences. In addition, the survival analysis was calculated at a median follow-up of 16.7 years.

RESULTS

At the final follow-up, 142 patients had died, and 38 had been lost to follow-up. The rate of revision-free implant survival at 16.7 years was 90.0% (95% CI 87.1-92.2%) and the rate of infection-free survival was 97.0% (IQR 95.2-98.2%). The reasons for revision surgery were aseptic loosening (32.9%), followed by infection (27.1%), inlay exchange (15.9%), and periprosthetic fractures (5.7%). At the clinical follow-up visit, the mean VAS score was 1.9 ± 1.9, the median TAS was 3 (IQR 2-4), and the mean KSS for pain and function were 83.5 ± 15.3 and 67.5 ± 25.2, respectively. The mean WOMAC score was 81.1 ± 14.9, and the median SF-12 scores for physical and mental health were 36.9 (IQR 29.8-45.1) and 55.8 (IQR 46.2-61.0), respectively. The mean knee flexion was 102.0° ± 15.4°. Male patients had better clinical outcome scores than female patients [SF-12 mental health score, p = 0.037; SF-12 physical health score, p = 0.032; KSS pain score (p < 0.001), and KSS functional score (p < 0.001)].

CONCLUSION

The ACS III TKA system is a suitable option for the treatment of end-stage osteoarthritis of the knee joint because of its adequate long-term survival. Our findings are in line with published data on similar TKA systems that have shown favourable clinical scores in males.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-Retrospective cohort 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.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of economic and healthcare resource utilization outcomes for robotic versus manual total knee arthroplasty

The introduction of robotics in orthopedic surgery has led to improved precision and standardization in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Clinical benefits of robotic versus manual TKA have been well established; however, evidence for economic and healthcare resource utilization outcomes (HRU) is lacking. The primary objective of this study was to compare economic and HRU outcomes for robotic and manual TKA. The secondary objective was to explore comparative robotic and manual TKA pain and opioid consumption outcomes. Multi-database literature searches were performed to identify studies comparing robotic and manual TKA from 2016 to 2022 and meta-analyses were conducted. This review included 50 studies with meta-analyses conducted on 35. Compared with manual TKA, robotic TKA was associated with a: 14% reduction in hospital length of stay (P = 0.022); 74% greater likelihood to be discharged to home (P < 0.001); and 17% lower likelihood to experience a 90-day readmission (P = 0.043). Robotic TKA was associated with longer mean operating times (incision to closure definition: 9.27 min longer, P = 0.030; general operating time definition: 18.05 min longer, P = 0.006). No differences were observed for total procedure cost and 90-day emergency room visits. Most studies reported similar outcomes for robotic and manual TKA regarding pain and opioid use. Coupled with the clinical benefits of robotic TKA, the economic impact of using robotics may contribute to hospitals' quality improvement and financial sustainability. Further research and more randomized controlled trials are needed to effectively quantify the benefits of robotic relative to manual TKA.

Micro Electromechanical System Navigation Assists Femoral Extramedullary Alignment Osteotomy in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Single-Blind Randomizing Study

OBJECTIVE

A micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) was developed based on spatial alignment and navigation technology to assist femoral extramedullary alignment osteotomy (FEAO) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The system can locate and adjust the femoral distal condylar osteotomy (FDCO) to obtain a better femoral prosthesis placement. It is a portable navigation device and provides an innovative approach for FDCO.

METHODS

Sixty patients who suffered from severe knee osteoarthritis who underwent unilateral TKA from May 14, 2021 to May 30, 2022 were randomly divided into a MEMS-FEAO group and a conventional femoral intramedullary alignment osteotomy (FIAO) group, with 30 cases in each group for a controlled retrospective study. The hip-knee-ankle angle (HKAA) of the lower limb was measured before and after surgery, the femoral valgus angle (FVA) was measured preoperatively, and the femoral prosthesis valgus angle (FPVA) and the femoral prosthesis flexion angle (FPFA) were measured postoperatively following computed tomography imaging protocols. Measurement data is statistically described as mean ± standard deviation c. The count data is described by frequency (constituent ratio) using the rank sum test.

RESULT

A total of 6.7% (2/30) of FEAO compared to 20.0% (6/30) of FIAO cases were postoperative deviations where the HKAA exceeded ±3° of neutral alignment (p < 0.05). The postoperative HKAA was 178.74° ± 1.56° versus 176.64° ± 3.39° (p < 0.05), the HKAA deviation was 1.25° ± 1.56° versus 3.36° ± 3.40° (p < 0.05), and the FPFA was 4.85° ± 2.46° versus 6.60° ± 1.86°(p < 0.05). Therefore, the differences were all statistically significant between the two groups. However, the FPVA was -0.59° ± 2.73° versus -0.80° ± 2.85° (p > 0.05), and there was no statistical significance between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The MEMS-FEAO system can improve the accurate alignment and can be utilized as a locator to obtain the best femoral prosthesis placement in TKA and significantly reduce the rate of poor force line of the lower limb.

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.

Does preoperative 3D CT planning helps in predicting the component size determination and alignment in automatic robotic total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA)

PURPOSE

Image-based Robotic Total knee Arthroplasty (RA-TKA)was developed with the purpose of enhancing the accuracy in determining the component sizes preoperatively and helping surgeons in minimizing errors and improve patient outcomes. The research aims to find the reliability of robotic-assisted TKR based on images in determining the correct component sizes using preoperative three-dimensional (3D) computer tomography.

METHOD

After ethical approval, we conducted a prospective study from March 2022 to December 2022. A total of 100 knees underwent image-based RA-TKA having grade 4 Osteoarthritis knee (Kellegren Lawrence classification). A single senior surgeon performed on all patients. Postoperative implant sizes and fit were assessed by five radiographic markers by an independent observer.

RESULTS

In our study, we found the mean age was (64.96 ± 7.3) years, with female to male ratio of 43:22. The preoperative 3D CT accuracy is 100% for femoral component sizing and 97% for the tibial component. There was a statistically significant improvement in varus deformity from preoperative 7.370 ± 3.70° to 1.24 0 ± 0.910° after surgery., p = 0.001. Improvement in flexion deformity correction was from preoperative 6.50 ± 6.30 to postoperative 1.640 ± 1.770, p = 0.001.

CONCLUSION

Our study concludes that the use of pre-operative 3D CT helps in predicting the component sizes, minimizes surgical time, and enhances implant position accuracy, as well as improves postoperative limb alignment in the coronal and sagittal planes.

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.

Postoperative scores for robot-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis

Background

Knee osteoarthritis is the most common joint disease globally. As obesity and age rates continue to rise in the U.S., the demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is expected to grow significantly by 2030. Advanced techniques such as robotic-assisted (RA-TKA) aim to address this growing concern and improve patient quality-of-life. Since utilization of RA-TKA increased from 2010 to 2018, it is important to compare RA-TKA to conventional TKA (C-TKA) performance. This study compares RA-TKA to C-TKA in patient-reported WOMAC scores and objective range of motion (ROM) scores in eligible short-term (one-year or less) and long-term (one-year to fifteen-years) postoperative follow-up studies.

Methods

A systematic review using the PubMed database was performed to identify articles including RA-TKA, CA-TKA, C-TKA, WOMAC scores, and ROM scores.

Results

Between RA-TKA and C-TKA, weighted analysis found significant effects in short-term (15.45, 95% CI: 4.96-25.94) and long-term (2.62, 95% CI: 0.62-4.61) WOMAC scores.

Conclusion

As approximately 7-20% of C-TKA surgeries result in poor subjective outcomes, and with revision rates and the demand for TKA set to rise, our analysis suggests that patient quality-of-life and cost effectiveness may be significantly improved by RA-TKA over C-TKA.

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.

Comparison of Postoperative Pain and Function in Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty Amongst Patients at King Fahad Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Background Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the definitive surgical treatment for end-stage osteoarthritis and has been proven to relieve pain and improve function. With the rise in demand and the number of TKA procedures every year, more studies have been conducted on robotic TKA. Objective The objective of this study is to compare the postoperative pain between robotic and conventional TKA and the postoperative functional level between robotic and conventional TKA. Method This is a quantitative, observational, prospective study conducted from February 2022 to August 2022 amongst patients in the orthopaedic department of King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, who have undergone primary TKA for end-stage osteoarthritis using robotic TKA and conventional TKA. After applying the exclusion and inclusion criteria, a total of 26 patients (12 robotic and 14 conventional) were included in the study. The patients were assessed at three time points: two weeks, six weeks, and three months post-op. They were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score and the visual analogue scores (VAS) used to assess pain. Result A total of 26 patients were included in this research. The patients were divided into two groups: 12 robotic TKA patients and 14 conventional TKA patients. In this study, while comparing patients who underwent robotic TKA with those who underwent conventional TKA, no statistical significance was found regarding pain and function at all stages postoperatively. Conclusion There was no short-term difference between robotic and conventional TKA regarding pain and function. There is a need for further extensive research on robotic TKA in terms of cost-effectiveness, complications, implant survivorship, and long-term outcomes.

Bicruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty non-inferior to posterior-stabilized prostheses after 5 years: a randomized, controlled trial

PURPOSE

Bicruciate-retaining (BCR) prostheses may improve satisfaction of patient undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to assess whether BCR prostheses provide better clinical outcomes than posterior-stabilized (PS) prostheses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a randomized single-blind control trial involving a total of 77 patients with knee osteoarthritis, randomly assigned to undergo TKA with a BCR or PS implant between 2015 and 2019. Mean follow-up period was 39 months. Clinical and demographic data were extracted manually from medical records. Data acquisition included patient demographics, knee range of motion, and patient-reported outcomes via KSS, KOOS, WOMAC, and SF-12 scores.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients were randomized to the PS group and 39 to the BCR group. At the 5-year follow-up, no statistical differences were noted for knee range of motion or patient-reported outcomes between the two groups, except for a greater knee flexion in the early follow-up period in the PS group. Five adverse events occurred in the BCR group compared to none in the PS group (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

BCR TKA yield similar clinical and patient-reported outcomes 5 years following the intervention compared with PS TKA. The BCR TKA had more complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I (Randomized Controlled Trial).

Image-Free Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Results in Quicker Recovery but Equivalent One-Year Outcomes Compared to Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Few studies have addressed whether robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) significantly impacts functional outcomes. This study was conducted to determine whether image-free RA-TKA improves function compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty (C-TKA), performed without the utilization of robotics or navigation, using the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) as measures of meaningful clinical improvement.

METHODS

A multicenter propensity score-matched retrospective study was conducted of RA-TKA using an image-free robotic system and C-TKA cases at an average follow-up of 14 months (range, 12 months to 20 months). Consecutive patients who underwent primary unilateral TKA and had a preoperative and postoperative Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) were included. The primary outcomes were the MCID and PASS for KOOS-JR. 254 RA-TKA and 762 C-TKA patients were included, with no significant differences in sex, age, body mass index, or comorbidities.

RESULTS

Preoperative KOOS-JR scores were similar in the RA-TKA and C-TKA cohorts. Significantly greater improvement in KOOS-JR scores were achieved at 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively with RA-TKA compared to C-TKA. While the mean 1-year postoperative KOOS-JR was significantly higher in the RA-TKA cohort, no significant differences were found in the Delta KOOS-JR scores between the cohorts, when comparing preoperative and 1-year postoperative. No significant differences existed in the rates of MCID or PASS being achieved.

CONCLUSION

Image-free RA-TKA reduces pain and improves early functional recovery compared to C-TKA at 4 to 6 weeks, but functional outcomes at 1 year are equivalent based on the MCID and PASS for KOOS-JR.

Moving beyond radiographic alignment: applying the Wald Principles in the adoption of robotic total knee arthroplasty

The use of robotics in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is growing at an exponential rate. Despite the improved accuracy and reproducibility of robotic-assisted TKA, consistent clinical benefits have yet to be determined, with most studies showing comparable functional outcomes and survivorship between robotic and conventional techniques. Given the success and durability of conventional TKA, measurable improvements in these outcomes with robotic assistance may be difficult to prove. Efforts to optimize component alignment within two degrees of neutral may be an attainable but misguided goal. Applying the "Wald Principles" of rationalization, it is possible that robotic technology may still prove beneficial, even when equivalent clinical outcomes as conventional methods, if we look beyond the obvious surrogate measures of success. Robotic systems may help to reduce inventory, streamline surgical trays, enhance workflows and surgical efficiency, optimize soft tissue balancing, improve surgeon ergonomics, and integrate artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms into a broader digital ecosystem. This article explores these less obvious alternative benefits of robotic surgery in the field of TKA.

Results of Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty at 2-Year Follow-up

Robotic-assisted technology has been developed to optimize the consistency and accuracy of bony cuts, implant placements, and knee alignments for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). With recently developed designs, there is a need for the reporting longer than initial patient outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare manual and robotic-assisted TKA at 2-year minimum for: (1) aseptic survivorship; (2) reduced Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (r-WOMAC) pain, physical function, and total scores; (3) surgical and medical complications; and (4) radiographic assessments for progressive radiolucencies. We compared 80 consecutive cementless robotic-assisted to 80 consecutive cementless manual TKAs. Patient preoperative r-WOMAC and demographics (e.g., age, sex, and body mass index) were not found to be statistically different. Surgical data and medical records were reviewed for aseptic survivorship, medical, and surgical complications. Patients were administered an r-WOMAC survey preoperatively and at 2-year postoperatively. Mean r-WOMAC pain, physical function, and total scores were tabulated and compared using Student's t-tests. Radiographs were reviewed serially throughout patient's postoperative follow-up. A p < 0.05 was considered significant. The aseptic failure rates were 1.25 and 5.0% for the robotic-assisted and manual cohorts, respectively. Patients in the robotic-assisted cohort had significantly improved 2-year postoperative r-WOMAC mean pain (1 ± 2 vs. 2 ± 3 points, p = 0.02), mean physical function (2 ± 3 vs. 4 ± 5 points, p = 0.009), and mean total scores (4 ± 5 vs, 6 ± 7 points, p = 0.009) compared with the manual TKA. Surgical and medical complications were similar in the two cohorts. Only one patient in the manual cohort had progressive radiolucencies on radiographic assessment. Robotic-assisted TKA patients demonstrated improved 2-year postoperative outcomes when compared with manual patients. Further studies could include multiple surgeons and centers to increase the generalizability of these results. The results of this study indicate that patients who undergo robotic-assisted TKA may have improved 2-year postoperative outcomes.

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.

Comparative assessment of current robotic-assisted systems in primary total knee arthroplasty

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has proven higher accuracy, fewer alignment outliers, and improved short-term clinical outcomes when compared to conventional TKA. However, evidence of cost-effectiveness and individual superiority of one system over another is the subject of further research. Despite its growing adoption rate, published results are still limited and comparative studies are scarce. This review compares characteristics and performance of five currently available systems, focusing on the information and feedback each system provides to the surgeon, what the systems allow the surgeon to modify during the operation, and how each system then aids execution of the surgical plan.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(1):13-18.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is widely recognized as an effective treatment for end-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA). Compared with conventional TKA, robotic-arm assisted TKA may improve patients' functionality and resulting quality of life by more accurate and precise component placement. Currently, the literature on cost-effectiveness of robotic-arm assisted TKA in the US is limited. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of robotic-arm assisted TKA relative to TKA in the Medicare-aged population including exploring the impact of hospital volume on cost-effectiveness outcomes.

METHODS

We developed a decision-analytic model to evaluate the costs, health outcomes, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of robotic-arm assisted TKA vs TKA in Medicare population with OA. We evaluated cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). We sourced costs from the literature including episode-of-care (EOC) costs from a Medicare study. We assessed cost-effectiveness of robotic-arm assisted TKA by hospital procedure volume and conducted deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA).

RESULTS

For the average patient treated in a hospital with an annual volume of 50 procedures, robotic-arm assisted TKA resulted in a total QALY of 6.18 relative to 6.17 under conventional TKA. Total discounted costs per patient were $32,535 and $31,917 for robotic-arm assisted TKA and conventional TKA, respectively. Robotic-arm assisted TKA was cost-effective in the base case with an ICER of $41,331/QALY. In univariate DSA, cost-effectiveness outcomes were most sensitive to the annual hospital procedure volume. Robotic-arm assisted TKA was cost-effective at a WTP of $50,000/QALY only when hospital volume exceeded 49 procedures per year. In PSA, robotic-arm assisted TKA was cost-effective at a $50,000/QALY WTP threshold in 50.4% of 10,000 simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high robotic purchase costs, robotic-arm assisted TKA is likely to be cost-effective relative to TKA in the Medicare population with knee OA in high-volume hospitals through lowering revision rates and decreasing post-acute care costs. Higher-volume hospitals may deliver higher value in performing in robotic-arm assisted TKA.

Fracture through tracking pin sites following a robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty

The use of computer-navigated, robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is expanding as the result of widespread efforts to improve the precision of implant placement and to restore mechanical, anatomic, and kinematic alignment. The procedure requires placement of femoral and tibial pins to mount the robotic tracking system. Fractures through tracking pin sites following robotic-assisted TKA are rare; only 30 cases have been reported to our knowledge. It is probable that this complication will become more frequent as the use of robotic-assisted TKAs continues to grow. We report the case of a 67-year-old female who suffered a fracture of the femur through two pin sites 3 months after a robotic-assisted TKA. We believe that this report is the first case in the radiologic literature. Our case demonstrates some of the difficulties of recognizing this complication and raises questions about appropriate post-operative imaging.

Where are We Now and What are We Hoping to Achieve with Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Critical Analysis of the Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) has been developed to improve knee kinematics and functional outcomes, expedite recovery, and improve implants long-term survivorship. Robotic devices are classified into active, semi-active, and passive, based on their degree of freedom. Their capacity to provide increased accuracy in implants positioning with reduced radiographic outliers has been widely proved. However, these early advantages are yet to be associated with long-term survivorship. Moreover, multiple drawbacks are still encountered including a variable learning curve, increased setup and maintenance costs, and potential complications related to the surgical technique. Despite recent technologies applied to TKA have failed to prove substantial improvements, robotic-assisted surgery seems to be here to stay and revolutionize the field of TKA. To support its consistent usage on a daily basis, long-term results are still awaited, and further improvements are necessary to reduce the expenses related to it.

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.

A new robotically assisted technique can improve outcomes of total knee arthroplasty comparing to an imageless navigation system

BACKGROUND

Robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty (RTKA) has shown improved knee alignment and reduced radiographic outliers. However, there remains debate on functional outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs). This study compares the 1-year clinical outcomes of a new imageless robotically assisted technique (ROSA Knee System, Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN) with an imageless navigated procedure (NTKA, iAssist Knee, Zimmer, Warsaw, IN).

METHODS

The study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data that compared the functional outcomes and PROMs of 50 imageless RTKA with 47 imageless NTKA at 1-year follow-up. Baseline characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative information were collected including complications, revisions, Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) score, and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12). Radiographic analysis of preoperative and postoperative images evaluating hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle was performed.

RESULTS

There was no difference regarding baseline characteristics between the groups. Mean operative time was significantly longer in the RTKA group (122 min vs. 97 min; p < 0.0001). Significant differences were reported for the "Pain" (85 [RTKA] vs 79.1 [NTKA]; p = 0.0283) subsection of the KOOS score. In addition, RTKA was associated with higher maximum range of motion (119.4° vs. 107.1°; p < 0.0001) and better mean improvement of the arc of motion by 11.67° (23.02° vs. 11.36°; p < 0.0001). No significant differences were noted for other subsections of KOOS, KSS, FJS-12, complications, or limb alignment at 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Imageless RTKA was associated with longer surgical time, better pain perception and improved ROM at 12-month follow-up compared with NTKA. No significant differences were reported on other PROMs, complication rates and radiographic outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Navigated and Robot-Assisted Technology in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Do Outcome Differences Achieve Minimal Clinically Important Difference?

BACKGROUND

In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), computer-assisted navigation (N-TKA) and robotic-assisted methods (RA-TKA) are intended to increase precision of mechanical and component alignment. However, the clinical significance of published patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) differences in comparison to conventional TKA (C-TKA) is unknown.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify all studies reporting perioperative PROMs for either primary N-TKA or RA-TKA with a C-TKA comparison cohort with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Relative improvements in PROMs for the two cohorts were compared to published minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values.

RESULTS

After systematic review, 21 studies (N = 3,214) reporting on N-TKA and eight studies (N = 1,529) reporting on RA-TKA met inclusion criteria. Eighteen of 20 studies (90%) reported improved radiographic outcomes with N-TKA relative to C-TKA; five of five studies reported improved radiographic outcomes with RA-TKA relative to C-TKA. Five of 21 studies (24%) reported statistically significant greater improvements in clinical PROMs for N-TKA relative to C-TKA, whereas only two (10%) achieved clinical significance relative to MCID on a secondary analysis. One of 8 studies (13%) reported statistically significant greater improvements in PROMs for RA-TKA relative to C-TKA, whereas none achieved clinical significance relative to MCID on a secondary analysis. No studies reported a significant difference in revision rates.

CONCLUSION

While most studies comparing RA-TKA and N-TKA with C-TKA demonstrate improved radiographic alignment outcomes, a minority of studies reported PROM differences that achieve clinical significance. Future studies should report data and be interpreted in the context of clinical significance to establish patient and surgeon expectations for emerging technologies.

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.

Adverse Events Associated With Robotic-Assisted Joint Arthroplasty: An Analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration MAUDE Database

BACKGROUND

The use of robotic assistance in arthroplasty is increasing; however, the spectrum of adverse events potentially associated with this technology is unclear. Improved understanding of the causes of adverse events in robotic-assisted arthroplasty can prevent future incidents and enhance patient outcomes.

METHODS

Adverse event reports to the US Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database involving robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and partial knee arthroplasty were reviewed to determine causes of malfunction and related patient impact.

RESULTS

Overall, 263 adverse event reports were included. The most frequently reported adverse events were unexpected robotic arm movement for TKA (59/204, 28.9%) and retained registration checkpoint for THA (19/44, 43.2%). There were 99 reports of surgical delay with an average delay of 20 minutes (range 1-120). Thirty-one cases reported conversion to manual surgery. In total, 68 patient injuries were reported, 7 of which required surgical reintervention. Femoral notching (12/36, 33.3%) was the most common for TKA and retained registration checkpoint (19/28, 67.9%) was the most common for THA. Although rare, additional reported injuries included femoral, tibial, and acetabular fractures, MCL laceration, additional retained foreign bodies, and an electrical burn.

CONCLUSION

Despite the increasing utilization of robotic-assisted arthroplasty in the United States, numerous adverse events are possible and technical difficulties experienced intraoperatively can result in prolonged surgical delays. The events reported herein seem to indicate that robotic-assisted arthroplasty is generally safe with only a few reported instances of serious complications, the nature of which seems more related to suboptimal surgical technique than technology. Based on our data, the practice of adding registration checkpoints and bone pins to the instrument count of all robotic-assisted TJA cases should be widely implemented to avoid unintended retained foreign objects.

A Newly Designed "SkyWalker" Robot Applied in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study for Femoral Rotational Alignment Restoration

Objective

This study explored whether robotic arm‐assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) has the advantage of restoring femoral rotational alignment compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty (COTKA).

Methods

Sixty patients (45 women and 15 men) attending our department from May 2019 to December 2020 were selected and divided into two groups, with 30 patients in each group, according to whether they underwent COTKA or RATKA. Femoral rotational alignment results, such as, posterior condylar angle (PCA), patella transverse axis‐femoral transepicondylar axis angle (PFA), radiological findings, such as, hip‐knee‐ankle angle (HKA), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), and operative data (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, tourniquet time, and length of stay (LOS), and clinical outcomes, such as maximum knee flexion angle (MKFA), Knee Society Score (KSS), and Western Ontario Mac Master University Index Score (WOMAC) were compared within and between the two groups.

Results

PCA and PFA in the RATKA group were (0.6 ± 0.3)° and (0.9 ± 0.3)°, respectively, which were smaller than (1.5 ± 2.0)° and (3.1 ± 1.1)° in the COTKA group (P < 0.05), and were closer to 0°; the differences in HKA, LDFA, and MPTA were not statistically significant. With the exception of the LDFA, the HKA, MPTA, PCA, and PFA improved in both groups after surgery (P < 0.05). The blood loss and the LOS of RATKA group were 192.3 ± 23.1 mL and 8.2 ± 1.4 days, which were less than 203.7 ± 29.8 mL and 9.3 ± 1.1 days of the COTKA group, but the operation time showed no statistically significant difference, and the tourniquet time was longer (P < 0.05). The MKFA in the RATKA group was (123.0 ± 3.7)°, which was greater than (116.3 ± 4.6)° in the COTKA group (P < 0.05). In terms of scores, the postoperative results were better than the preoperative results in both groups (P < 0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups.

Conclusion

The accuracy of femoral rotational alignment reconstructed achieved by RATKA is significantly better than that of COTKA and is more conducive to the recovery of knee flexion function after surgery; although RATKA reduces intraoperative blood loss and postoperative LOS, the short‐term clinical efficacy comparison has not yet demonstrated the advantages of robotic technology, and a more optimized design is needed to improve the efficiency of RATKA surgery.

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 arthroplasty: The latest developments

Joint arthroplasty is an effective method for treating end-stage joint lesions and damages. Robotic arm-assisted arthroplasty, a rapidly developing technology that combines navigation technology, minimally invasive technology, and precise control technology of the robotic arm, can achieve accurate preoperative planning, optimal selection of implants, minimally invasive surgery, precise osteotomy, and accurate placement of the artificial joint. It has the characteristics of high accuracy and stability, and thus is more and more widely used in the field of joint surgery. In this paper, we systematically reviewed the application and clinical efficacy of robotic arm-assisted technology in hip and knee arthroplasty to provide reference for its future promotion.

Robot-assisted Knee Arthroplasty: Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis of the knee joint leads to a decrease in the volume of movements, a violation of the sliding of articular surfaces, and a change in the axis of the limb under load, which affects the biomechanics of walking. AIM: This study aims to compare the results of robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and manual techniques, their influence on the biomechanical and podometric parameters of the patient’s walk. METHODS: A prospective randomized study of 68 patients was carried out in the period from 2020 to 2021. Our follow-up period was 1 year. All patients were performed arthroplasty of one knee joint. The main Group “A” included 33 patients TKA with the use of an active robotic setting “TSolution-One” (“THINK Surgical, Inc.” [Fremont, California, USA]); the comparison Group “B” consisted of 35 patients with manual technic of TKA. We studied pain syndrome on the visual analog scale, functional state on the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), the volume of ROM movements, and the deviation of the mechanical axis by teleroentgenography of the lower limb. Objective analysis of limb function was performed on the «Alter-G» and the «C-mill». RESULTS: Post-operative pain syndrome on the 1st day after surgery in Group A is stronger by 7.9%, but by the 5th day after surgery in Group A, the pain syndrome is lower by 14.3%. ROM in Group A is better by 16% by 3 months after surgery, after 1 year by 10%. The positioning accuracy of the implant in Group A is 30% better. There are no statistically significant differences in the OKS and WOMAC scales between the groups. The results of restoring normal step in Group A are 13.5% better than in Group B. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted TKA gives more accurate alignment of the mechanical axis, which improves the biomechanics of walking.

Improved joint awareness two years after total knee arthroplasty with a handheld image-free robotic system

Literature into the short-term follow-up of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using a handheld image- free robotic system are scarce. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between patients operated for TKA with an image- free robotic system (robot group) or conventionally TKA (conventional group) 2 years postoperatively. A total of 147 patients were evaluated after TKA, respectively 73 in the robot and 74 in conventional group. Outcome measures included adverse events (AEs), hospital readmission rate, patient satisfaction and the following PROMs: Pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score Knee (FJS-12) and the EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D). There were no statistically significant differences in the number of AEs; 8 (10.8%) in the conventional group versus 7 (9.7%) in the robot group. The FJS (p ≤ 0.05) and OKS (p ≤ 0.05) differed statistically in favour of the robot group. The EQ-5D and EQ-5D VAS did not statistically differed between the groups (p=0.231 and p=0.373 respectively). The VAS pain improved statically significant in both groups when comparing the pre- and postoperative values (5.8 points). Patients operated with a handheld image-free robotic system have the ability to forget their artificial knee joint in everyday life as measured with the FJS-12 at short-term follow-up.

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.

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.

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.

Robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty: an evolution in progress. A concise review of the available systems and the data supporting them

INTRODUCTION

A review of the data supporting robotic systems currently available is presented focussing on precision and reproducibility, radiological outcomes, clinical outcomes, and survivorship.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Scientific literature published on robotic systems for knee arthroplasty was reviewed using the reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were any study involving robotic-assisted UKA or TKA that reported precision of implant positioning or functional outcomes or range of motion or survivorship, including cadaveric or dry bone studies with a minimum of 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies were identified for robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and 24 studies for robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Those that reported on radiological outcomes or cadaver studies consistently demonstrated improved precision with the use of robotic systems irrespective of the system. PROMS and survival data demonstrated equivalent short-term results. However, many studies reported outcomes inconsistently and few had long-term clinical follow-up or survivorship data.

CONCLUSIONS

This review adds to the body of evidence supporting improved precision and reproducibility with robotic assistance in knee arthroplasty. Despite intensive funding of research into robotic knee systems, there remains considerable heterogeneity in exposure and outcome analysis and few quality long-term studies demonstrating translation to better clinical outcomes and implant survivorship.

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

BACKGROUND

Robotic and navigated TKA procedures have been introduced to improve component placement precision in the hope of improving implant survivorship and other clinical outcomes. Although numerous comparative studies have shown enhanced precision and accuracy in placing components, most comparative studies have not shown that such interventions result in improved implant survival. Given what we know about effect sizes from large arthroplasty registries, large cohort studies, and large randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we wondered how large randomized trials would need to be to detect such small differences, and if the number is very high, what that would tell us about the value of these treatments for preventing revision surgery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this simulation study, we asked: Given that survivorship differences between technology-assisted TKA (TA-TKA, which we defined as either navigated or robot-assisted TKA) and conventional TKA are either small or absent based on large arthroplasty registries, large cohort studies, and large RCTs, how large would randomized trials need to be to detect small differences between TA-TKA and conventional TKA if they exist, and how long would the follow-up period need to be to have a reasonable chance to detect those differences?

METHODS

We used estimated effect sizes drawn from previous clinical and registry studies, combined with estimates of the accuracy and precision of various navigation and robotic systems, to model and simulate the likely outcomes of potential comparative clinical study designs. To characterize the ranges of patients enrolled and general follow-up times associated with traditional RCT studies, we conducted a structured search of previously published studies evaluating the effect of robotics and navigation on revision rates compared with that of conventional TKA. The structured search of the University of British Columbia's library database (which automatically searches medical publication databases such as PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science) and subsequent searching through included studies' reference lists yielded 103 search results. Only clinical studies assessing implant survival differences between patient cohorts of TA-TKA and conventional TKA were included. Studies analyzing registry data, using cadaver specimens, assessing revision TKA, conference proceedings, and preprint services were excluded. Twenty studies met all our inclusion criteria, but only one study reported a statistically significant difference between the conventional and robotic or navigated groups. Next, we generated a large set of patients with simulated TKA (1.5 million), randomly assigning each simulated patient a set of patient-specific factors (age at the index surgery, gender, and BMI) drawn from data from registries and published information. We divided this set of simulated procedures into four groups, each associated with a coronal alignment precision reported for different types of surgical procedures, and randomly assigned each patient an overall coronal alignment consistent with their group's precision. TA procedures were modeled based on the alignment precision that an intervention could deliver, regardless of whether the technology used was navigation- or robot-assisted. To evaluate the power associated with using different cohort sizes, we ran a Monte Carlo simulation generating 3000 simulated populations that were drawn (with replacement) from the large set of simulated patients with TKA. We simulated the time to revision for aseptic loosening for each patient, computed the corresponding Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and applied a log-rank test to each study for statistical differences in revision rates at concurrent follow-up timepoints (1-25 years). From each simulation associated with a given cohort size, we determined the percentage of simulated studies that found a statistically significant difference at each follow-up interval. For each alternative precision, we then also calculated the expected reduction in revision rates (effect size) attributable to TA-TKA intervention and the number needed to treat (NNT) using TA-TKA to prevent one revision at 2, 5, 10, and 15 years after index surgery for the entire set of Kaplan-Meier survival analyses.

RESULTS

The results from our simulation found survivorship differences favoring TA-TKA ranging from 1.4% to 2.0% at 15 years of follow-up. Comparative studies would need to enroll between 2500 and 4000 patients in each arm of the study, depending on the precision of the navigated or robotic procedure, to have an 80% chance of showing this reduction in revision rates at 15 years of follow-up. For the highest precision simulated intervention, the NNT using TA-TKA to prevent one revision was 1000 at 2 years, 334 at 5 years, 100 at 10 years, and 50 at 15 years post-index surgery.

CONCLUSION

Based on these simulations, it appears that TA-TKA interventions could potentially result in a relative reduction in revision rates as large as 27% (from 7.5% down to about 5.5% at 15 years for the intervention with the most precise coronal alignment); however, since this 2% absolute reduction in revision rates is relatively small in comparison with the baseline success rate of TKA and would not be realized until 15 years after the index surgery, traditional RCT studies would require excessively large numbers of patients to be enrolled and excessively long follow-up times to demonstrate whether such a reduction actually exists.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Given that the NNTs to avoid revisions at various time points are predicted to be high, it would require correspondingly low system costs to justify broad adoption of TA-TKA based on avoided revision costs alone, though we speculate that technology assistance could perhaps prove to be cost effective in the care of patients who are at an elevated risk of revision.

The Accuracy and Clinical Success of Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background: Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) has emerged as a patient-specific customizable tool that enables 3-dimensional preoperative planning, intraoperative adjustment, robotic-assisted bone preparation, and soft-tissue protection. Haptic rTKA may enhance component positioning, but only a few small studies have examined patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes after haptic rTKA. Purpose: In patients who underwent haptic rTKA, we sought to evaluate (1) the discrepancy in alignment between the executed surgical plan and implanted alignment in the coronal and sagittal planes 1 year postoperatively and (2) patient-reported outcomes 2 years postoperatively. Methods: From a prospectively collected database, we reviewed 105 patients who underwent haptic rTKA from August 2016 to May 2017. Two fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons independently reviewed hip-to-ankle standing biplanar radiographs to measure overall limb alignment and individual tibial and femoral component alignment relative to the mechanical axis and compared this to the executed surgical plan. Patient-reported outcomes were collected preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively using the Lower Activity Extremity Score (LEAS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior (KOOS Jr.), and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Results: Mean patient age was 62.4 years, and mean body mass index was 30.6 kg/m². Interobserver reliability was significant with a κ of 0.89. Absolute mean deviations in postoperative coronal alignment compared to intraoperative alignment were 0.625° ± 0.70° and 0.45° ± 0.50° for the tibia and femur, respectively. Absolute mean deviations in postoperative tibial sagittal alignment were 0.47° ± 0.76°. Overall mechanical alignment was 0.97° ± 1.79°. Outcomes in LEAS, KOOS Jr., and NPRS changed from 8 to 10, 78 to 88.3, and 8 to 1, respectively. Conclusions: Haptic rTKA demonstrated high reliability and accuracy (less than 1°) of tibial coronal, femoral coronal, and tibial sagittal component alignment postoperatively compared to the surgical plan. Patient-reported outcomes improved, as well. A more rigorous study on long-term outcomes is warranted.

Navigation und Robotik in der Knieendoprothetik

Hintergrund

Die Langlebigkeit einer Knieprothese hängt von der korrekten Ausrichtung der Prothesenkomponenten und der mechanischen Achse des Beins sowie einer optimalen Weichteilbalancierung ab. Um dieses Ziel präziser und sicherer zu erreichen, wurde die computerassistierte Chirurgie entwickelt. Ziel dieses Artikels ist es, die Navigation und Robotik zu bewerten und die aktuellen Ergebnisse zu diskutieren.

Methode

Umfassende Literaturrecherche in der Datenbank PubMed und dem Suchdienst Google Scholar.

Ergebnisse

Die computerassistierte Chirurgie führt zu einer präziseren Ausrichtung der mechanischen Beinachse und der Positionierung der Prothesenkomponenten. Trotzdem sind die klinischen Ergebnisse zur Kniefunktion und die Resultate der patientenbezogenen Fragebögen (PROMs) kontrovers. Sie zeigen, wie für die Überlebensrate, keinen signifikanten Unterschied zur konventionellen Technik. Hohe Anschaffungs- und Unterhaltskosten limitieren zudem die Verbreitung dieser Systeme.

Schlussfolgerung

Momentan bietet die bildgestützte Navigation dem Chirurgen bei gewissen Operationsschritten eine wertvolle Unterstützung für ein präziseres und sichereres Arbeiten. Trotzdem sind Langzeitstudien zur Kniefunktion, zu den PROMs, zur Überlebensrate dringend erforderlich. In der Robotik zeigen nur kurzfristige Ergebnisse ähnliche Trends wie bei der Navigation. Die Robotiksysteme müssen und werden sich weiterentwickeln, um den Anforderungen der Nutzer und Patienten zu entsprechen (Kosten, Größe, Programmierung).

Bone Cuts Accuracy of a System for Total Knee Arthroplasty including an Active Robotic Arm

Introduction: This study aimed to assess the bone cuts accuracy of a system for total knee arthroplasty including an active robotic arm. A second objective was to compare the accuracy among orthopaedic surgeons of different levels of experience. Methods: Three orthopaedic surgeons cut 10 sawbone knees each. Planned and actual bone cuts were compared using computed tomography. Difference with respect to the planning was expressed as three position and three orientation errors following the anatomical planes. Statistical tests were performed to detect bias and compare surgeons. Results: None of the 30 knees presented an outlier error, meaning an error ≥3 mm or ≥3°. The root-mean-square values of the 12 error types were below 0.8 mm or 0.8°, except for the femoral proximal–distal errors (1.7 mm) and the tibial anterior-posterior errors (1.4 mm). Biases were observed, particularly in femoral proximal–distal and tibial anterior–posterior positions. Median differences between surgeons were all lower than 0.8 mm and 0.5°, with statistically significant differences among surgeons in the femoral proximal–distal errors and the tibial anterior–posterior errors. Conclusions: The system tested in this study achieved accurate bone cuts independently of the surgeon’s level of experience. Biases were observed, suggesting that there might be options to improve the accuracy, particularly in proximal–distal position for the femur and in anterior–posterior position for the tibia.

Imageless robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty accurately restores the radiological alignment with a short learning curve: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The study compared a novel imageless robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) and conventional TKA by considering (1) radiological outcomes, (2) outliers of radiological outcomes, and (3) learning curve.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled study performed by a single surgeon evaluated 152 patients (152 knees): 75 patients undergoing RATKA and 77 patients undergoing conventional TKA. Mechanical alignment, radiological implant positioning, and outliers were analyzed for radiological outcomes. Cumulative summation (CUSUM) analysis was used to assess the learning curve for operative time in RATKA.

RESULTS

The RATKA had significantly better accuracy of knee alignment and component positioning than conventional TKA. The hip-knee-ankle axis and implant position outliers were significantly lower in the RATKA, with 94.7% of patients had achieved an overall mechanical alignment within 3° of a neutral mechanical axis. Changes in posterior condylar offset and joint line were significantly lower in the RATKA. A learning curve of seven cases for operative time was obtained for the RATKA.

CONCLUSION

The imageless RATKA has better alignment accuracy with a short learning curve; thus, it presents an attractive option for TKA.