Robotic-assisted vs conventional surgery in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiological study

Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty improves functional outcomes, complications, and revisions

Aims

Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (R-UKA) has been proposed as an approach to improve the results of the conventional manual UKA (C-UKA). The aim of this meta-analysis was to analyze the studies comparing R-UKA and C-UKA in terms of clinical outcomes, radiological results, operating time, complications, and revisions.

Methods

The literature search was conducted on three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science) on 20 February 2024 according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Inclusion criteria were comparative studies, written in the English language, with no time limitations, on the comparison of R-UKA and C-UKA. The quality of each article was assessed using the Downs and Black Checklist for Measuring Quality.

Results

Among the 3,669 articles retrieved, 21 studies on 19 series of patients were included. A total of 3,074 patients (59.5% female and 40.5% male; mean age 65.2 years (SD 3.9); mean BMI 27.4 kg/m2 (SD 2.2)) were analyzed. R-UKA obtained a superior Knee Society Score improvement compared to C-UKA (mean difference (MD) 4.9; p < 0.001) and better Forgotten Joint Score postoperative values (MD 5.5; p = 0.032). The analysis of radiological outcomes did not find a statistically significant difference between the two approaches. R-UKA showed longer operating time (MD 15.6; p < 0.001), but reduced complication and revision rates compared to C-UKA (5.2% vs 10.1% and 4.1% vs 7.2%, respectively).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis showed that the robotic approach for UKA provided a significant improvement in functional outcomes compared to the conventional manual technique. R-UKA showed similar radiological results and longer operating time, but reduced complication and revision rates compared to C-UKA. Overall, R-UKA seems to provide relevant benefits over C-UKA in the management of patients undergoing UKA.

Femoral Coronal Malalignment is Associated With Failure in Mobile-Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Femur-first (FF) technique for mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been described as an alternative to tibia-first (TF) technique. The aim of this study was to compare the radiographic results in UKAs using FF or TF techniques and their influence on failure rates.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 288 UKAs with a minimum 2-year follow-up. There were 147 knees in the TF and 141 knees in the FF cohorts. Alignment parameters and overhang were assessed as outliers and far outliers. The mean follow-up was 6 years (range, 2 to 16), the mean age was 63 years (range, 27 to 92), and 45% of patients were women. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were carried out with Cox regression models.

RESULTS

There were 13 and 6 revisions in the TF and FF cohorts, respectively. The FF had lower rates of femoral coronal alignment (FCA) or femoral sagittal alignment outliers compared to the TF (5.7% versus 19%, P = .011). Tibial coronal alignment and tibial sagittal alignment did not significantly differ between the techniques (22.7% in FF versus 29.9% in TF, P = .119). Overhang outliers did not differ significantly between the groups. Younger age was associated with a higher revision rate (P = .006), while FF versus TF, sex, body mass index, and postoperative mechanical axis did not show statistically significant associations. In multivariate analysis, FCA outliers and younger age were significantly associated with revision.

CONCLUSIONS

The FF technique in mobile-bearing UKA resulted in fewer FCA outliers compared to TF. Despite improved knee alignment with the FF technique, FCA outliers and younger age were associated with a higher revision rate, independent of technique.

Early weight bearing versus late weight bearing after intramedullary nailing for distal femoral fracture (AO/OTA 33) in elderly patients: A multicenter propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess differences in implant failure and bone union rates, amount of change in alignment of lower extremities, and walking ability between early weight-bearing (EWB) and late weight-bearing (LWB) groups following retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIMN) for distal femoral fracture (AO/OTA 33) (DFF) at multiple centers using propensity score matching.

METHODS

The data of 213 patients who underwent RIMN from 2012 to 2019 in multiple tertiary hospitals were extracted from our database. Cases with the following factors were excluded: age <60, open fracture, AO/OTA-type 33-C3 fracture, preoperative New Mobility Score (NMS) < 3, postoperative follow-up <3 months, and unknown weight-bearing start time. Eighty-four patients were divided into the EWB and LWB groups. EWB group patients were encouraged to perform partial weight-bearing walking at ≤4 weeks after surgery. LWB group patients were not allowed weight bearing for >4 weeks after surgery. After propensity score matching was applied, 26 cases remained in each group.

RESULTS

There were no cases of nail failure in either the EWB group or LWB group (P = 1). Screw failure occurred in 0 cases in the EWB group and in 1 case (4.5%) in the LWB group (P = 1.0). Non-union occurred in 5 patients (19.2%) in the EWB group and 4 patients (15.3%) in the LWB group (P = 1). The mean amount of change in lower extremities alignment did not differ between the two groups. The median Knee Society Score was 95.5 (59-100) vs. 93 (72-100) points (P = 0.39). The median NMS was 7 (0-9) vs. 7 (4-9) points (P = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant intergroup differences in the rates of implant failure, bone union at one year after surgery, amount of change in lower extremities alignment, or walking ability. We suggest that early weight bearing after RIMN for DFF may not be harmful in elderly people.

Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: historical perspectives and current innovations

Robotic assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RAUKA) has emerged as a successful approach for optimizing implant positioning accuracy, minimizing soft tissue injury, and improving patient-reported outcomes. The application of RAUKA is expected to increase because of its advantages over conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. This review article provides an overview of RAUKA, encompassing the historical development of the procedure, the features of the robotic arm and navigation systems, and the characteristics of contemporary RAUKA. The article also includes a comparison between conventional unicompartmental arthroplasty and RAUKA, as well as a discussion of current challenges and future advancements in the field of RAUKA.

Robotic Versus Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Surgery: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Robotic-assisted surgery is a computer-controlled technique that may improve the accuracy and outcomes of unicompartmental total knee arthroplasty (TKA), a partial knee replacement surgery. The purpose of a meta-analysis about robotic-assisted versus conventional surgery for unicompartmental TKA is to compare the effectiveness of these two methods based on the current evidence. Our meta-analysis can help inform clinical decisions and guidelines for surgeons and patients who are considering unicompartmental TKA as a treatment option. We searched four online databases for studies that compared the two methods until March 2023. We used RevMan software to combine the data from the studies. We calculated the mean difference (MD) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome, which are statistical measures of the difference and the uncertainty between the two methods. We included 16 studies in our analysis. We found that robotic-assisted surgery had a better hip-knee-ankle angle, which is a measure of how well the knee is aligned, than conventional surgery (MD = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.16-1.56). We also found that robotic-assisted surgery had a better Oxford Knee score, which is a measure of how well the knee functions, than conventional surgery (MD = 3.03, 95% CI = 0.96-5.110). This study compared the results of conventional and robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in 12 studies. We concluded that robotic-assisted surgery may have some benefits over conventional surgery in terms of alignment and function of the knee. However, we did not find any significant difference between the two methods in terms of other outcomes, such as pain, range of motion, health status, and joint awareness. Therefore, we suggest that more research is needed to confirm these results and evaluate the long-term effects and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery.

Rehabilitation approach in robot assisted total knee arthroplasty: an observational study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with the aid of Navio Robot, comparing it with standard prosthetic surgery on the functional outcomes of patients after an intensive rehabilitation program.

METHOD

A case-control observational study was conducted on patients undergoing TKA for severe KOA. All patients underwent the same intensive hospital rehabilitation program of 14 daily sessions lasting 3 h. The following rating scales were administered: Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Knee Society Score (KSS) and 12-Item Short Form Survey scale. Patient assessments were performed 1 week post-surgery (T0), 1 month post-surgery (T2), and 3 months post-surgery (T3). The primary outcomes were active knee extension and flexion and pain severity. The secondary outcomes were functional capacity and quality of life.

RESULTS

Using repeated measures ANOVA, we observed at T1 a statistically different difference for the treatment group compared to the control group about KSS (p < 0.05), pain (p < 0.05), and knee flexion (p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference between the two groups was observed for knee extension (p = 0.09) and the SF-12 scale (p = 0.52). At T2 instead, we observed a statistically significant difference for the treatment group compared to the control group as regards KSS (p < 0.05) and knee flexion (p < 0.05), while no statistically significant difference was observed for pain (p = 0.83), knee extension (p = 0.60), and the SF-12 scale (0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study has demonstrated that robot-NAVIO assisted knee prosthesis surgery, associated with a specific intensive rehabilitation treatment, in the short and medium term, determines good pain control, better flexion recovery and a improvement of functional capacity.

Better accuracy and implant survival in medial imageless robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared to conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: two- to eleven-year follow-up of three hundred fifty-six consecutive knees

PURPOSE

Implant malpositioning, joint line (JL) lowering, and malalignment have been identified as risk factors for implant failure in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The aims of this study were to compare the accuracy of implant positioning in robotic-assisted UKA versus conventional UKA in a large cohort and examine the correlation with implant survival at mid-term follow-up.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 356 medial UKAs from 2011 to 2019. The radiological measurements performed were coronal positioning of tibial implant according to Cartier angle (Δ Cartier), posterior tibial slope (PTS), residual hip-knee-ankle (HKA), and JL restoration. Outliers were defined as follows: post-operative HKA < 175° or > 180°, Δ Cartier > 3° or <  - 3°, JL change ≥ 2 mm, and PTS < 2° or > 8°. The survival probability was reported at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

Out of the 356 knees included, 159 underwent conventional UKA (44.5%) and 197 (55.5%) robotic-assisted UKA. The mean follow-up was 61.3 months ± 24.0. Robotic UKA was associated with better accuracy compared to conventional UKA in relation to HKA (67% vs 56%, p = 0.023), JL restoration (70% vs 44%, p < 0.0001), PTS (83% vs 55%, p < 0.0001), and tibial varus restoration (65% vs 55%, p = 0.049). Implant survival in the robotic group was found to be superior at the last follow-up (96.4% versus 87.3% at 9 years, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Robotic assistance in patients undergoing medial UKA was associated with better accuracy compared to conventional UKA with respect to tibial implant positioning, post-operative limb alignment, and JL restoration. This was translated in improved survival at mid-term follow-up favouring the robotic group.

Reduced Early Revision Surgery and Medical Complications in Computer-assisted Knee Arthroplasty Compared With Non-computer-assisted Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Computer assistance can help surgeons achieve mechanical accurate alignment, but the clinical effect of this technology in different arthroplasty types remains controversial because of conflicting functional outcomes, revision rates, and complication rates. The goal of this study was to compare 90-day medical complications and 1 and 2-year revision surgeries after computer-assisted patellofemoral arthroplasty, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CA-UKA), bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CA-BKA), and total knee arthroplasty (CA-TKA) with non-computer-assisted procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using the Mariner data set of the PearlDiver Patient Records Database from 2010 to 2018. Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify patients who underwent patellofemoral arthroplasty, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, bicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and total knee arthroplasty with or without computer assistance for osteoarthritis. All included patients were followed up for 2 years. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

On multivariable analysis, revision within 1 year was decreased in patients who underwent computer-assisted patellofemoral arthroplasty (odds ratio [OR]: 0.541, P = 0.031), CA-UKA (OR: 0.798, P = 0.019), and computer-assisted bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (OR: 0.186, P = 0.025) compared with the same surgeries without technology assistance. CA-TKA had decreased odds of revision for aseptic loosening at 2 years (OR: 0.789, P < 0.001). CA-UKA and CA-TKA had decreased risk of overall 90-day medical complications (OR: 0.838, P < 0.001; OR: 0.903, P < 0.001, respectively) and major complications (OR: 0.750, P = 0.004; OR: 0.822, P < 0.001, respectively).

DISCUSSION

Complication rates and revision surgeries for all arthroplasty types were equivalent or more favorable when computer assistance was used during surgery. Our results quantify some early benefits to using computer assistance in total and partial knee arthroplasties.

Comparison of Robotic and Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes in Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Robotic-arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RUKA) was developed to increase the accuracy of bone alignment and implant positioning. This retrospective study explored whether RUKA has more favorable overall outcomes than conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CUKA). A total of 158 patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis were recruited, of which 85 had undergone RUKA with the Mako system and 73 had undergone CUKA. The accuracy of component positioning and bone anatomical alignment was compared using preoperative and postoperative radiograph. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using questionnaires, which the patients completed preoperatively and then postoperatively at six months, one year, and two years. In total, 52 patients from the RUKA group and 61 from the CUKA group were eligible for analysis. The preoperative health scores and Kellgren-Lawrence scores were higher in the RUKA group. RUKA exhibited higher implant positioning accuracy, thus providing a superior femoral implant angle, properly aligned implant placement, and a low rate of overhang. RUKA also achieved higher accuracy in bone anatomical alignment (tibial axis angle and anatomical axis angle) than CUKA, but surgical time was longer, and blood loss was greater. No significant differences were observed in the clinical outcomes of the two procedures.

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Robotic Arm Technology

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a highly successful operation for the treatment of end-stage osteoarthritis of the knee. Increasing use of computer-assisted and robotic-assisted total joint arthroplasty has been shown to improve component position, with short-term studies demonstrating improved survivability in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Robotic-assisted technology has been shown to be helpful in revising unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to TKA, as well as hip fusion to total hip arthroplasty, but few have described revision of a primary TKA. This case report describes the use of robotic-assisted technology in revision TKA. Robotic assistance during revision TKA may improve component alignment and increase prosthesis longevity. Future research is needed to investigate the effects on survivorship and cost.

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

INTRODUCTION

A review of the data supporting robotic systems currently available is presented focussing on precision and reproducibility, radiological outcomes, clinical outcomes, and survivorship.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Scientific literature published on robotic systems for knee arthroplasty was reviewed using the reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were any study involving robotic-assisted UKA or TKA that reported precision of implant positioning or functional outcomes or range of motion or survivorship, including cadaveric or dry bone studies with a minimum of 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies were identified for robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and 24 studies for robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Those that reported on radiological outcomes or cadaver studies consistently demonstrated improved precision with the use of robotic systems irrespective of the system. PROMS and survival data demonstrated equivalent short-term results. However, many studies reported outcomes inconsistently and few had long-term clinical follow-up or survivorship data.

CONCLUSIONS

This review adds to the body of evidence supporting improved precision and reproducibility with robotic assistance in knee arthroplasty. Despite intensive funding of research into robotic knee systems, there remains considerable heterogeneity in exposure and outcome analysis and few quality long-term studies demonstrating translation to better clinical outcomes and implant survivorship.

Navigation und Robotik in der Knieendoprothetik

Hintergrund

Die Langlebigkeit einer Knieprothese hängt von der korrekten Ausrichtung der Prothesenkomponenten und der mechanischen Achse des Beins sowie einer optimalen Weichteilbalancierung ab. Um dieses Ziel präziser und sicherer zu erreichen, wurde die computerassistierte Chirurgie entwickelt. Ziel dieses Artikels ist es, die Navigation und Robotik zu bewerten und die aktuellen Ergebnisse zu diskutieren.

Methode

Umfassende Literaturrecherche in der Datenbank PubMed und dem Suchdienst Google Scholar.

Ergebnisse

Die computerassistierte Chirurgie führt zu einer präziseren Ausrichtung der mechanischen Beinachse und der Positionierung der Prothesenkomponenten. Trotzdem sind die klinischen Ergebnisse zur Kniefunktion und die Resultate der patientenbezogenen Fragebögen (PROMs) kontrovers. Sie zeigen, wie für die Überlebensrate, keinen signifikanten Unterschied zur konventionellen Technik. Hohe Anschaffungs- und Unterhaltskosten limitieren zudem die Verbreitung dieser Systeme.

Schlussfolgerung

Momentan bietet die bildgestützte Navigation dem Chirurgen bei gewissen Operationsschritten eine wertvolle Unterstützung für ein präziseres und sichereres Arbeiten. Trotzdem sind Langzeitstudien zur Kniefunktion, zu den PROMs, zur Überlebensrate dringend erforderlich. In der Robotik zeigen nur kurzfristige Ergebnisse ähnliche Trends wie bei der Navigation. Die Robotiksysteme müssen und werden sich weiterentwickeln, um den Anforderungen der Nutzer und Patienten zu entsprechen (Kosten, Größe, Programmierung).

Efficacy of GCWB106 (Chrysanthemum zawadskii var. latilobum extract) in osteoarthritis of the knee: A 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

GreenCross Wellbeing Corporation (GCWB) 106 is a food item based on Chrysanthemum zawadskii var. latilobum extract. It has an inhibitory effect on joint inflammation.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of GCWB106 for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee joint.

METHODS

Overall, 121 participants with mild OA were recruited and randomly divided into two groups. One group received GCWB106 for 12 weeks and the other group received placebo for 12 weeks. Outcomes were evaluated using the Korean-Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index (K-WOMAC), visual analog scale, Korean Short Form Health Survey 36 score, and laboratory test results.

RESULTS

After 12 weeks of study treatment, the GCWB106 group exhibited a significant improvement compared with the placebo group in overall K-WOMAC score (P = .042) and K-WOMAC physical function score (P = .015). The GCWB106 group showed significant improvement in the visual analog scale pain score (P < .001) compared with the placebo group after 6 weeks and 12 weeks; no adverse drug reactions or serious adverse events were reported in either group.

CONCLUSION

GCWB106 can safely reduce pain and improve knee function with therapeutic effects in OA of the knee joint.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study, Level I.

Stiffness after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Risk factors and arthroscopic treatment

Introduction: One of the principal complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is stiffness. There are no publications concerning stiffness after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Study objectives were to describe the incidence of stiffness after UKA, to look for risk factors, and to describe safe and effective arthroscopic treatment. Methods: There were 240 UKA performed between March 2016 and January 2019 included. Robotic-assisted surgery was performed in 164 patients and mechanical instrumentation in 76 patients. Stiffness was defined as flexion < 90° or a flexion contracture > 10° during the first 45 post-operative days. Patients with stiffness were treated with arthroscopic arthrolysis. Several factors were studied to look for risk factors of stiffness: body mass index, gender, age, mechanical or robotic instrumentation, preoperative flexion, previous meniscectomy, and anticoagulant treatment. Arthrolysis effectiveness was evaluated by flexion improvement and UKA revision rate. Results: 22 patients (9%) developed stiffness. Mechanical instrumentation significantly increased the risk of stiffness with OR = 0.26 and p = 0.005. Robotic-assisted surgery decreased the risk of stiffness by five-fold. Before arthrolysis, mean knee flexion was 79°, versus 121° (53% improvement) after arthroscopic arthrolysis. Only 2 patients (9%) underwent UKA revision after arthrolysis. Discussion: Stiffness after UKA is an important complication with an incidence of 9% in this study. Arthroscopic arthrolysis is a safe and effective treatment with a range of motion improvement of > 50%. Robotic-assisted surgery significantly decreases the risk of postoperative stiffness.

Level of evidence: Level III, therapeutic study, retrospective cohort study