Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has proven higher accuracy, fewer alignment outliers, and improved short-term clinical outcomes when compared to conventional TKA. However, evidence of cost-effectiveness and individual superiority of one system over another is the subject of further research. Despite its growing adoption rate, published results are still limited and comparative studies are scarce. This review compares characteristics and performance of five currently available systems, focusing on the information and feedback each system provides to the surgeon, what the systems allow the surgeon to modify during the operation, and how each system then aids execution of the surgical plan. Cite this article: Abstract
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a major orthopaedic
intervention. The length of a patient's stay has been progressively
reduced with the introduction of enhanced recovery protocols: day-case
surgery has become the ultimate challenge. This narrative review shows the potential limitations of day-case
TKA. These constraints may be social, linked to patient’s comorbidities,
or due to surgery-related adverse events (e.g. pain, post-operative
nausea and vomiting, etc.). Using patient stratification, tailored surgical techniques and
multimodal opioid-sparing analgesia, day-case TKA might be achievable
in a limited group of patients. The younger, male patient without
comorbidities and with an excellent social network around him might
be a candidate. Demographic changes, effective recovery programmes and less invasive
surgical techniques such as unicondylar knee arthroplasty, may increase
the size of the group of potential day-case patients. The cost reduction achieved by day-case TKA needs to be balanced
against any increase in morbidity and mortality and the cost of
advanced follow-up at a distance with new technology. These factors
need to be evaluated before adopting this ultimate ‘fast-track’
approach. Cite this article:
Pathological assessment of periprosthetic tissues is important, not only for diagnosis, but also for understanding the pathobiology of implant failure. The host response to wear particle deposition in periprosthetic tissues is characterised by cell and tissue injury, and a reparative and inflammatory response in which there is an innate and adaptive immune response to the material components of implant wear. Physical and chemical characteristics of implant wear influence the nature of the response in periprosthetic tissues and account for the development of particular complications that lead to implant failure, such as osteolysis which leads to aseptic loosening, and soft-tissue necrosis/inflammation, which can result in pseudotumour formation. The innate response involves phagocytosis of implant-derived wear particles by macrophages; this is determined by pattern recognition receptors and results in expression of cytokines, chemokines and growth factors promoting inflammation and osteoclastogenesis; phagocytosed particles can also be cytotoxic and cause cell and tissue necrosis. The adaptive immune response to wear debris is characterised by the presence of lymphoid cells and most likely occurs as a result of a cell-mediated hypersensitivity reaction to cell and tissue components altered by interaction with the material components of particulate wear, particularly metal ions released from cobalt-chrome wear particles. Cite this article: Professor N. A. Athanasou. The pathobiology and pathology of aseptic implant failure.
