BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown mechanical alignment influences the outcome of TKA. Robotic systems have been developed to improve the precision and accuracy of achieving component position and mechanical alignment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined whether robotic-assisted implantation for TKA (1) improved clinical outcome; (2) improved mechanical axis alignment and implant inclination in the coronal and sagittal planes; (3) improved the balance (flexion and extension gaps); and (4) reduced complications, postoperative drainage, and operative time when compared to conventionally implanted TKA over an intermediate-term (minimum 3-year) followup period. METHODS: We prospectively randomized 100 patients who underwent unilateral TKA into one of two groups: 50 using arobotic-assisted procedure and 50 using conventional manual techniques. Outcome variables considered were postoperative ROM, WOMAC scores, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee scores, mechanical axis alignment, flexion/extension gap balance, complications, postoperative drainage, and operative time. Minimum followup was 41 months (mean, 65 months; range, 41-81 months). RESULTS: There were no differences in postoperative ROM, WOMAC scores, and HSS knee scores. The robotic-assisted group resulted in no mechanical axis outliers (> ± 3° from neutral) compared to 24% in the conventional group. There were fewer robotic-assisted knees where the flexion gap exceeded the extension gap by 2 mm. The robotic-assisted procedures took an average of 25 minutes longer than the conventional procedures but had less postoperative blood drainage. There were no differences in complications between groups. CONCLUSIONS:Robotic-assisted TKA appears to reduce the number of mechanical axis alignment outliers and improve the ability to achieve flexion-extension gap balance, without any differences in clinical scores or complications when compared to conventional manual techniques.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown mechanical alignment influences the outcome of TKA. Robotic systems have been developed to improve the precision and accuracy of achieving component position and mechanical alignment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined whether robotic-assisted implantation for TKA (1) improved clinical outcome; (2) improved mechanical axis alignment and implant inclination in the coronal and sagittal planes; (3) improved the balance (flexion and extension gaps); and (4) reduced complications, postoperative drainage, and operative time when compared to conventionally implanted TKA over an intermediate-term (minimum 3-year) followup period. METHODS: We prospectively randomized 100 patients who underwent unilateral TKA into one of two groups: 50 using a robotic-assisted procedure and 50 using conventional manual techniques. Outcome variables considered were postoperative ROM, WOMAC scores, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee scores, mechanical axis alignment, flexion/extension gap balance, complications, postoperative drainage, and operative time. Minimum followup was 41 months (mean, 65 months; range, 41-81 months). RESULTS: There were no differences in postoperative ROM, WOMAC scores, and HSS knee scores. The robotic-assisted group resulted in no mechanical axis outliers (> ± 3° from neutral) compared to 24% in the conventional group. There were fewer robotic-assisted knees where the flexion gap exceeded the extension gap by 2 mm. The robotic-assisted procedures took an average of 25 minutes longer than the conventional procedures but had less postoperative blood drainage. There were no differences in complications between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted TKA appears to reduce the number of mechanical axis alignment outliers and improve the ability to achieve flexion-extension gap balance, without any differences in clinical scores or complications when compared to conventional manual techniques.
Authors: Sascha Karunaratne; Michael Duan; Evangelos Pappas; Brett Fritsch; Richard Boyle; Sanjeev Gupta; Paul Stalley; Mark Horsley; Daniel Steffens Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2018-09-15 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Ming Han Lincoln Liow; Pak Lin Chin; Keng Jin Darren Tay; Shi Lu Chia; Ngai Nung Lo; Seng Jin Yeo Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 1.858
Authors: Jelle P van der List; Harshvardhan Chawla; Leo Joskowicz; Andrew D Pearle Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Chelsea S Sicat; James C Chow; Bertrand Kaper; Riddhit Mitra; Jing Xie; Ran Schwarzkopf Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2021-07-25 Impact factor: 3.067