Literature DB >> 30742701

Robotic-Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty More Accurately Restored the Posterior Condylar Offset Ratio and the Insall-Salvati Index Compared to the Manual Technique; A Cohort-Matched Study.

Assem A Sultan1, Linsen T Samuel1, Anton Khlopas1, Nipun Sodhi2, Manoshi Bhowmik-Stoker3, Antonia Chen4, Fabio Orozco5, Frank Kolisek6, Ormonde Mahoney7, Langan Smith8, Arthur Malkani8, Robert M Molloy1, Michael A Mont2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Despite the demonstrated success of modern total knee arthroplasty (TKA), it remains a procedure that involves sophisticated preoperative planning and meticulous technique to reconstruct the mechanical axis, achieve ideal joint balance, and restore maximal range-of-motion (ROM). Recently, robotic-arm assisted TKAs have emerged as a promising new technology offering several technical advantages, and it is achieving excellent radiological results, including establishing the posterior condylar offset ratio (PCOR) and the Insall-Salvati Index (ISI). Studies have demonstrated that these parameters are surgically modifiable, and their accurate restoration (fewer mean differences) correlate with improved final joint range-of-motion. However, there is a paucity of studies that evaluate these parameters in light of performing robotic-arm assisted TKA. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to compare: 1) PCOR and 2) ISI restoration in a cohort of patients who underwent robotic-arm assisted versus manual TKA.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated a series of 43 consecutive robotic-arm assisted (mean age 67 years; range, 46 to 79 years) and 39 manual total knee arthroplasties (mean age 66 years; range, 48 to 78 years) performed by seven fellowship-trained joint reconstructive surgeons. All surgeries were performed using medial para-patellar approaches by high-volume surgeons. Using the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System, preoperative and four-to six-week postoperative radiographs were analyzed to determine the PCOR and patella height based on the ISI.
RESULTS: The mean postoperative PCOR was larger in manual TKA when compared to the robotic-assisted cohort (0.53 vs. 0.49; p=0.024). The absolute mean difference between pre- and postoperative PCOR was larger in manual when compared to robotic-arm assisted TKA (0.03 vs. 0.004; p=0.01). In addition, the number of patients who had postoperative ISI outside of the normal range (0.8 to 0.12) was higher in the manual cohort (12 vs. 4).
CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent TKA using robotic-arm assisted technology had smaller mean differences in PCOR which has been previously shown to correlate with better joint ROM at one year following surgery. In addition, these patients were less likely to have values outside of normal ISI, which means they are less likely to develop patella baja, a condition in which the patella would impinge onto the patellar component, leading to restricted flexion and overall decreased ROM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30742701

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


  14 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Is sequential bilateral robotic total knee arthroplasty a safe procedure? A matched comparative pilot study.

Authors:  Cécile Batailler; Mike B Anderson; Xavier Flecher; Matthieu Ollivier; Sébastien Parratte
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 3.067

3.  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

Review 4.  [Market overview: Robotic-assisted arthroplasty : Current robotic systems, learning curve and cost analysis].

Authors:  Lars-René Tuecking; Max Ettinger; Henning Windhagen; Peter Savov
Journal:  Orthopadie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-08-09

Review 5.  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.

Authors:  Hannes Vermue; Cécile Batailler; Paul Monk; Fares Haddad; Thomas Luyckx; Sébastien Lustig
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-09-25       Impact factor: 2.928

6.  Robotic-assisted surgery and kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty (RASKAL study): a protocol of a national registry-nested, multicentre, 2×2 factorial randomised trial assessing clinical, intraoperative, functional, radiographic and survivorship outcomes.

Authors:  Samuel J MacDessi; Gregory C Wernecke; Durga Bastiras; Tamara Hooper; Emma Heath; Michelle Lorimer; Ian Harris
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 3.006

7.  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

8.  Less iatrogenic soft-tissue damage utilizing robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty when compared with a manual approach: A blinded assessment.

Authors:  Emily L Hampp; Nipun Sodhi; Laura Scholl; Matthew E Deren; Zachary Yenna; Geoffrey Westrich; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2019-11-02       Impact factor: 5.853

9.  Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty vs Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Nationwide Database Study.

Authors:  Sione A Ofa; Bailey J Ross; Travis R Flick; Akshar H Patel; William F Sherman
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2020-11-07

Review 10.  A clinical review of robotic navigation in total knee arthroplasty: historical systems to modern design.

Authors:  Ahmed Siddiqi; Timothy Horan; Robert M Molloy; Michael R Bloomfield; Preetesh D Patel; Nicolas S Piuzzi
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2021-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.