Abstract
A functional total knee replacement has to be well aligned, which implies that it should lie along the mechanical axis and in the correct axial and rotational planes. Incorrect alignment will lead to abnormal wear, early mechanical loosening, and patellofemoral problems. There has been increased interest of late in total knee arthroplasty with robot assistance. This study was conducted to determine if robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty is superior to the conventional surgical method with regard to the precision of implant positioning.
Twenty knee replacements of ten robot-assisted and another ten conventional operations were performed on ten cadavers. Two experienced surgeons performed the surgery. Both procedures were undertaken by one surgeon on each cadaver. The choice of which was to be done first was randomized. After the implantation of the prosthesis, the mechanical-axis deviation, femoral coronal angle, tibial coronal angle, femoral sagittal angle, tibial sagittal angle, and femoral rotational alignment were measured via three-dimensional CT scanning. These variants were then compared with the preoperative planned values.
In the robot-assisted surgery, the mechanical-axis deviation ranged from −1.94 to 2.13° (mean: −0.21°), the femoral coronal angle ranged from 88.08 to 90.99° (mean: 89.81°), the tibial coronal angle ranged from 89.01 to 92.36° (mean: 90.42°), the tibial sagittal angle ranged from 81.72 to 86.24° (mean: 83.20°), and the femoral rotational alignment ranged from 0.02 to 1.15° (mean: 0.52°) in relation to the transepicondylar axis. In the conventional surgery, the mechanical-axis deviation ranged from −3.19 to 3.84°(mean: −0.48°), the femoral coronal angle ranged from 88.36 to 92.29° (mean: 90.50°), the tibial coronal angle ranged from 88.15 to 91.51° (mean: 89.83°), the tibial sagittal angle ranged from 80.06 to 87.34° (mean: 84.50°), and the femoral rotational alignment ranged from 0.32 to 4.13° (mean: 2.76°) in relation to the transepicondylar axis. In the conventional surgery, there were two cases of outlier outside the range of 3° varus or valgus of the mechanical-axis deviation. The robot-assisted surgery showed significantly superior femoral-rotational-alignment results compared with the conventional surgery (p=0.006). There was no statistically significant difference between robot-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty in the other variants. All the variants were measured with high intraobserver and interobserver reliability.
In conclusion, Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty showed excellent precision in the sagittal and coronal planes of the three-dimensional CT. Especially, better accuracy in femoral rotational alignment was shown in the robot-assisted surgery than in the conventional surgery despite the fact that the surgeons who performed the operation were more experienced and familiar with the conventional surgery than with robot-assisted surgery. It can thus be concluded that robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty is superior to the conventional total knee arthroplasty.
