Literature DB >> 28696495

Robotic-Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Demonstrated Soft Tissue Protection.

Anton Khlopas1, Morad Chughtai1, Emily L Hampp2, Laura Y Scholl2, Michael Prieto3, Ta-Cheng Chang3, Abdullah Abbasi3, Manoshi Bhowmik-Stoker2, Jason Otto3, David J Jacofsky4, Michael A Mont1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: While total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures have demonstrated clinical success, occasionally intraoperative complications can occur. Collateral or posterior cruciate ligament injury, instability, extensor mechanism disruption, and tibiofemoral or patellofemoral dislocation are among a few of the intraoperatively driven adverse events prevalently ranked by The Knee Society. Robotic-arm assisted TKA (RATKA) provides a surgeon the ability to three-dimensionally plan a TKA and use intraoperative visual, auditory, and tactile feedback to ensure that only the desired bone cuts are made. The potential benefits of soft tissue protection in these surgeries need to be further evaluated. The purpose of this cadaver study was to assess the a) integrity of various knee soft tissue structures (medial collateral ligament [MCL], lateral collateral ligament [LCL], posterior cruciate ligament [PCL], and the patellar ligament), as well as b) the need for tibial subluxation and patellar eversion during RATKA procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six cadaver knees were prepared using RATKA by a surgeon with no prior clinical robotic experience. These were compared to seven manually performed cases as a control. The mean Kellgren-Lawrence score was 2.8 (range, 0 to 4) in RATKA and 2.6 (range, 1 to 4) in the manual cohort. The presence of soft tissue damage was assessed by having an experienced surgeon perform a visual evaluation and palpation of the PCL, MCL, LCL, and the patellar ligament after the procedures. In addition, leg pose and retraction were documented during all bone resections. The amount of tibial subluxation and patellar eversion was recorded for each case.
RESULTS: For all RATKA-assisted cases, there was no visible evidence of disruption of any of the ligaments. All RATKA cases were left with a bone island on the tibial plateau, which protected the PCL. Tibial subluxation and patella eversion were not required for visualization in any RATKA cases. In two of the seven MTKA cases, there was slight disruption noted of the PCL, although this did not lead to any apparent change in the functional integrity of the ligament. All MTKA cases required tibial subluxation and patellar revision to achieve optimal visualization. DISCUSSION: Several aspects of soft tissue protection were noted during the study. During bone resections, the tibia in RATKA procedures did not require subluxation, which may reduce ligament stretching or decrease complication rates. Potential patient benefits for short-term recovery and decreased morbidity to reduce operative complications should be studied in a clinical setting. Since RATKA uses a stereotactic boundary to constrain the sawblade, which is generated based on the implant size, shape, and plan, and does not have the ability to track the patient's soft tissue structures, standard retraction techniques during cutting are recommended. Therefore, the retractor placement and potential for soft tissue protection needs to be further investigated. RATKA has the potential to increase soft tissue protection when compared to manual TKA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28696495

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Technol Int        ISSN: 1090-3941


  23 in total

1.  Computer-Assisted Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery.

Authors:  Timo Stübig; Henning Windhagen; Christian Krettek; Max Ettinger
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 5.594

2.  A progressive scholarly acceptance analysis of robot-assisted arthroplasty: a review of the literature and prediction of future research trends.

Authors:  Dylan Misso; Emily Zhen; John Kelly; Dermot Collopy; Gavin Clark
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-01-03

Review 3.  Robotics in trauma and orthopaedics.

Authors:  Karthik Karuppiah; Joydeep Sinha
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 4.  Robotic technology in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  Babar Kayani; Sujith Konan; Atif Ayuob; Elliot Onochie; Talal Al-Jabri; Fares S Haddad
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2019-10-01

Review 5.  Technology in Arthroplasty: Are We Improving Value?

Authors:  Bradford S Waddell; Kaitlin Carroll; Seth Jerabek
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-09

6.  [A prospective randomized controlled trial on the short-term effectiveness of domestic robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty].

Authors:  Mingcheng Yuan; Xiaojun Shi; Qiang Su; Xufeng Wan; Zongke Zhou
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-10-15

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

Authors:  Johanna Elliott; Jobe Shatrov; Brett Fritsch; David Parker
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-09-07       Impact factor: 3.067

8.  Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty is comparable to conventional total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  James Randolph Onggo; Jason Derry Onggo; Richard De Steiger; Raphael Hau
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2020-06-14       Impact factor: 3.067

9.  [Application and research progress of robotic-arm in total knee arthroplasty].

Authors:  Maolin Sun; Liu Yang; Rui He
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-07-15

10.  Verification and clinical translation of a newly designed "Skywalker" robot for total knee arthroplasty: A prospective clinical study.

Authors:  Runzhi Xia; Zanjing Zhai; Jingwei Zhang; Degang Yu; Liao Wang; Yuanqing Mao; Zhenan Zhu; Haishan Wu; Kerong Dai; Mengning Yan; Huiwu Li
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.