Tibial baseplate positioning in robotic-assisted and conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

This study compared tibial baseplate alignment (TBA) between robotic-arm-assisted (RAA) and conventional (CONV) unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKAs). We hypothesized that RAA would increase the percentage of implants within a predetermined safe zone (SZ). We identified 177 CONV and 87 RAA UKAs through our center's patient registry. Two individuals reviewed postoperative knee radiographs and determined TBA. Coronal baseplate positioning was more accurate (i.e., within the SZ) for RAA (2.6° ± 1.5° vs. 3.9° ± 2.4°, p < 0. 0001). Conversely, sagittal alignment was more accurate for CONV (4.9° ± 2.8° vs. 2.4° ± 1.6°, p < 0.0001). RAA was more precise in both planes (p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the percentage of implants within the SZ between the two groups (p = 1.0).