Andrew G Kim1, Zachary Bernhard1, Alexander J Acuña1, Victoria S Wu1, Atul F Kamath2,3. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. kamatha@ccf.org. 3. Center for Hip Preservation, Orthopaedic and Rheumatologic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Mail Code A41, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. kamatha@ccf.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our systematic review and meta-analysis sought to assess how technology-assistance impacts (1) post-operative pain and (2) opioid use in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Four online databases were queried for studies published up to October 2021 that reported on pain and opioid usage between technology-assisted and manual TKA (mTKA) patients. Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models were utilized to calculate pooled mean difference (MDs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs). Subgroup analyses were conducted to isolate robotic-arm assisted (RAA) and computed-assisted navigation (CAN) cohorts. Risk of bias was assessed for all included non-randomized studies with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool. For the randomized control trials included in our study, the Detsky scale was applied. RESULTS: Our analysis included 31 studies, reporting on a total of 761,300 TKAs (mTKA: n = 753,554; Computer-Assisted Navigation (CAN): n = 1,309; Robotic-Arm Assisted (RAA): n = 6437). No differences were demonstrated when evaluating WOMAC (MD: 0.00, 95% CI - 0.69 to 0.69; p = 1.00), KSS (MD: 0.01, 95% CI - 1.46 to 1.49; p = 0.99), KOOS (MD - 2.91, 95% CI - 6.17 to 0.34; p = 0.08), and VAS (MD - 0.54, 95% CI - 1.01 to - 0.007; p = 0.02) pain scores between cohorts. There was mixed evidence regarding how opioid consumption differed between TKA techniques. CONCLUSION: The present analysis demonstrated no difference in terms of pain across a variety of utilized patient-reported pain measurements. However, there were mixed results regarding how opioid consumption varied between manual and technology-assisted cohorts, particularly in the immediate post-operative period. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: Our systematic review and meta-analysis sought to assess how technology-assistance impacts (1) post-operative pain and (2) opioid use in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Four online databases were queried for studies published up to October 2021 that reported on pain and opioid usage between technology-assisted and manual TKA (mTKA) patients. Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models were utilized to calculate pooled mean difference (MDs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs). Subgroup analyses were conducted to isolate robotic-arm assisted (RAA) and computed-assisted navigation (CAN) cohorts. Risk of bias was assessed for all included non-randomized studies with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool. For the randomized control trials included in our study, the Detsky scale was applied. RESULTS: Our analysis included 31 studies, reporting on a total of 761,300 TKAs (mTKA: n = 753,554; Computer-Assisted Navigation (CAN): n = 1,309; Robotic-Arm Assisted (RAA): n = 6437). No differences were demonstrated when evaluating WOMAC (MD: 0.00, 95% CI - 0.69 to 0.69; p = 1.00), KSS (MD: 0.01, 95% CI - 1.46 to 1.49; p = 0.99), KOOS (MD - 2.91, 95% CI - 6.17 to 0.34; p = 0.08), and VAS (MD - 0.54, 95% CI - 1.01 to - 0.007; p = 0.02) pain scores between cohorts. There was mixed evidence regarding how opioid consumption differed between TKA techniques. CONCLUSION: The present analysis demonstrated no difference in terms of pain across a variety of utilized patient-reported pain measurements. However, there were mixed results regarding how opioid consumption varied between manual and technology-assisted cohorts, particularly in the immediate post-operative period. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: Thomas Czurda; Peter Fennema; Martin Baumgartner; Peter Ritschl Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2009-11-28 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Johannes Cip; Mark Widemschek; Matthias Luegmair; Mitchell B Sheinkop; Thomas Benesch; Arno Martin Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2014-05-04 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Johannes Cip; Florian Obwegeser; Thomas Benesch; Christian Bach; Paul Ruckenstuhl; Arno Martin Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2017-12-21 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Christopher L Blum; Eric Lepkowsky; Adil Hussein; Edgar A Wakelin; Christopher Plaskos; Jan A Koenig Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2021-07-20 Impact factor: 3.067