Patient dissatisfaction following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with manual jig-based instruments has been reported to be as high as 30%. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has been increasingly used in an effort to improve patient outcomes, however there is a paucity of literature examining patient satisfaction after RA-TKA. This study aims to identify the incidence of patients who were not satisfied following RA-TKA and to determine factors associated with higher levels of dissatisfaction. This was a retrospective review of 674 patients who underwent primary TKA between October 2016 and September 2020 with a minimum two-year follow-up. A five-point Likert satisfaction score was used to place patients into two groups: Group A were those who were very dissatisfied, dissatisfied, or neutral (Likert score 1 to 3) and Group B were those who were satisfied or very satisfied (Likert score 4 to 5). Patient demographic data, as well as preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures, were compared between groups.Aims
Methods
Mechanical axis limb alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has demonstrated excellent long-term survivorship; however, patient satisfaction continues to demand improvement. Alternative emerging alignment concepts including kinematic and tibial constitutional varus have been introduced but remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes and patient satisfaction following TKA with tibial components placed in constitutional varus alignment. This was a retrospective cohort analysis from a total joint registry of 114 patients with preoperative varus deformity who underwent primary TKA with tibial component placed in 1–3 degrees of constitutional varus. The group included 59 males (52%) and 55 (48%) females with a mean age of 67 years (range 43 – 85) and mean BMI of 32.0 kg/m2 (range 21 – 51 kg/m2) with a minimum 1 year follow-up. Patients were stratified into 3 groups based on the preoperative varus alignment: Group A between 1°- 5° varus (43 knees), Group B between 6°- 10° (56 knees), and Group C greater than 10° (16 knees). The target constitutional tibial varus alignment was selected based on the extent of the patient's deformity.Introduction
Methods
