Ricarda Stauss1, Peter Savov2, Lars-René Tuecking2, Henning Windhagen2, Max Ettinger2. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Anna-Von-Borries-Strasse 1-7, 30625, Hanover, Germany. ricarda.stauss@diakovere.de. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Anna-Von-Borries-Strasse 1-7, 30625, Hanover, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Complex primary total knee arthroplasties (TKA) are reported to be associated with excessive episode of care (EOC) costs as compared to noncomplex procedures. The impact of robotic assistance (rTKA) on economic outcome parameters in greater case complexity has not been described yet. The purpose of this study was to investigate economic outcome parameters in the 90-days postoperative EOC in robotic-assisted complex versus noncomplex procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a retrospective, single-center review of 341 primary rTKAs performed between 2017 and 2020. Patient collective was stratified into complex (n = 218) and noncomplex TKA (n = 123) based on the presence of the following criteria: Obese BMI, coronal malalignment, flexion contracture > 10°, posttraumatic status, previous correction osteotomy, presence of hardware requiring removal during surgery, severe rheumatoid arthritis. Group comparison included surgery duration, length of stay (LOS), surgical site complications, readmissions, and revision procedures in the 90-days EOC following rTKA. RESULTS: The mean surgery duration was marginally longer in complex rTKA, but showed no significant difference (75.26 vs. 72.24 min, p = 0.258), neither did the mean LOS, which was 8 days in both groups (p = 0.605). No differences between complex and noncomplex procedures were observed regarding 90-days complication rates (7.34 vs. 4.07%, p = 0.227), readmission rates (3.67 vs. 3.25%, p = 0.841), and revision rates (2.29 vs. 0.81%, p = 0.318). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted primary TKA reduces the surgical time, inpatient length of stay as well as 90-days complication and readmission rates of complex TKA to the level of noncomplex TKA. Greater case complexity does not seem to have a negative impact on economic outcome parameters when surgery is performed with robotic assistance.
INTRODUCTION: Complex primary total knee arthroplasties (TKA) are reported to be associated with excessive episode of care (EOC) costs as compared to noncomplex procedures. The impact of robotic assistance (rTKA) on economic outcome parameters in greater case complexity has not been described yet. The purpose of this study was to investigate economic outcome parameters in the 90-days postoperative EOC in robotic-assisted complex versus noncomplex procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a retrospective, single-center review of 341 primary rTKAs performed between 2017 and 2020. Patient collective was stratified into complex (n = 218) and noncomplex TKA (n = 123) based on the presence of the following criteria: Obese BMI, coronal malalignment, flexion contracture > 10°, posttraumatic status, previous correction osteotomy, presence of hardware requiring removal during surgery, severe rheumatoid arthritis. Group comparison included surgery duration, length of stay (LOS), surgical site complications, readmissions, and revision procedures in the 90-days EOC following rTKA. RESULTS: The mean surgery duration was marginally longer in complex rTKA, but showed no significant difference (75.26 vs. 72.24 min, p = 0.258), neither did the mean LOS, which was 8 days in both groups (p = 0.605). No differences between complex and noncomplex procedures were observed regarding 90-days complication rates (7.34 vs. 4.07%, p = 0.227), readmission rates (3.67 vs. 3.25%, p = 0.841), and revision rates (2.29 vs. 0.81%, p = 0.318). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted primary TKA reduces the surgical time, inpatient length of stay as well as 90-days complication and readmission rates of complex TKA to the level of noncomplex TKA. Greater case complexity does not seem to have a negative impact on economic outcome parameters when surgery is performed with robotic assistance.
Authors: Mark I Froimson; Adam Rana; Richard E White; Amanda Marshall; Steve F Schutzer; William L Healy; Peggy Naas; Gail Daubert; Richard Iorio; Brian Parsley Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Atul F Kamath; Paul M Courtney; Kevin J Bozic; Samir Mehta; Brian S Parsley; Mark I Froimson Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2015-05-29 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Andrew J Clair; Perry J Evangelista; Claudette M Lajam; James D Slover; Joseph A Bosco; Richard Iorio Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Sean P Ryan; Christine J Wu; Johannes F Plate; Michael P Bolognesi; William A Jiranek; Thorsten M Seyler Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2020-07-31 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Katherine A Lygrisse; Stephen Zak; Vivek Singh; Lorraine H Hutzler; Ran Schwarzkopf; Joshua C Rozell Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2020-09-18 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Hiba K Anis; Nipun Sodhi; Rushabh M Vakharia; Giles R Scuderi; Arthur L Malkani; Martin W Roche; Michael A Mont Journal: J Knee Surg Date: 2019-08-28 Impact factor: 2.757