Outpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA) has remained controversial and challenging. Traditional hospital stays following total joint arthroplasty were substantial and resulted in increased rates of morbidity, significant pain, and severe restriction in mobility. Advancements in the surgical approach, anesthetic regimens, and the initiation of rapid rehabilitation protocols have had an impact on the length of recovery following elective THA. Still, very few studies have specifically outlined outpatient hip arthroplasty and, thus far, none have addressed the use of robotic-arm navigation in outpatient THA. This article describes in detail the technique used to perform outpatient THA with the use of robotic-arm assistance. We believe that outpatient THA using robotic-arm assistance in combination with tissue-preserving surgery, multi-modal pain and nausea management, early rehabilitation, and stringent patient selection yields a suitable alternative to inpatient joint replacement

Introduction. Isolated lateral compartment osteoarthritis (OA) occurs in 5–10% of knees with OA [1, 2]. Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (LUKA) emerged as a treatment to this disease in the early 80s but challenging surgical technique has limited the prevalence of this treatment option [1–3]. A robotic-arm assisted surgical technique (MAKO Surgical Corp.) has emerged as a way to achieve precise implant positioning which can potentially improve surgical outcomes. Objectives. The purpose of this study was to evaluate short term outcomes for patients that received LUKA using a novel robotic-arm assisted surgical technique. Methods. Thirty-seven (37) patients (12 male, 25 female - mean age 63.7 years) with lateral OA received a robotic-arm assisted LUKA between July 2011 and September 2013 from 3 surgeons. All patients were evaluated by an independent surgeon not involved in the treatment of these patients at an average follow-up of 15.9 months (8–27). Range of motion and limb alignment was compared pre- and post-operatively. Results. Lateral UKA using robotic-arm assistance improved the post-operative range of motion an average of 4.8 ± 7.1º (p<0.0001) from a starting value of 136.5 ± 8.6º to a post-operative value of 141.6 ± 8.0º. In addition, patients began with a pre-operative deformity of 3.1 ± 3.2º of valgus and resulted in a post-operative alignment of 0.8 ± 1.9º of valgus corresponding to an average correction of 2.4 ± 2.3º less valgus (p<0.000001). The average operative time was 44.0 ± 10.8 minutes with 97% of the cases completed within 60 minutes. Conclusion. These results suggest that LUKA with robotic-arm assistance provides excellent post-operative alignment and demonstrate a reliable option for management of isolated lateral knee OA

Background. Intraoperative balancing of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be accomplished by either more prevalent but less predictable soft tissue releases, implant realignment through adjustments of bone resection or a combination of both. Robotic TKA allows for quantifiable precision performing bone resections for implant realignment within acceptable final component and limb alignments. Objective. To provide a direct comparison of patient reported outcomes between implant realignment and traditional ligamentous release for soft tissue balancing in TKA. Methods. IRB approved retrospective single surgeon cohort study of prospectively collected operative and clinical data of consecutive patients that underwent TKA with a single radius design utilizing kinematic sensors to assess final balance with or without robotic assistance allowing for a minimum of 12 months clinical follow up. Operative reports were reviewed to characterize the balancing strategy. In surgical cases using robotic assistance, pre-operative plan changes that altered implant placement were included in the implant realignment group. Any patient that underwent both implant realignment and soft tissue releases was analyzed separately. Kinematic sensor data was utilized to quantify ultimate balance to assure that each cohort had equivalent balance. Patient reported outcome data consisting of Knee Society- Knee Scores (KS-KS), Knee Society- Function Scores (KS-FS), and Forgotten Joint Scores (FJS) were prospectively collected during clinical follow up. Results. 182 TKA were included in the study. 3-Month clinical follow up was available for 174/182 knees (91%), 1-Year clinical follow up was available for 167/182 knees (92%) and kinematic sensor data was available for 169/182 knees (93%). Kinetic sensor data showed that on average all of the balancing subgroups achieved clinically equivalent balance. Use of robotic-arm assistance provided the tools and confidence to decrease from ligament release only in 40.8% of non-robotic cases to 3.8% in the robotic group, and the use of component realignment alone increased from 23.7% in the non-robotic cases to 48.1% in the robotic TKA group. KS-KS, KS-FS and FJS scores showed improvements in outcomes at both the 3-month and 1-year time points in the implant realignment cohort compared to the ligamentous release cohort. KS-KS, KS-FS, and FJS at 1-year were 1.6, 7.6, and 17.2 points higher respectively. While none of the comparisons reached statistical significance, KS-FS at 1 year showed a statistically and clinically significant difference (MCID 6.1–6.4) increase of 7.7 points in the implant realignment cohort compared to the ligamentous cohort. The 1-year trend can be further explained by the outperformance (MCID increase of 6.4 points) of the implant realignment robotic cohort at 1-year compared to the non-robotic ligamentous cohort. Conclusions. Directly comparing TKA patients balanced with implant realignment alone versus ligamentous release alone versus combined technique, a trend toward clinical improvement above a minimally clinical significant difference in KS-FS scores benefiting the implant realignment technique was seen at both 3-months and 1-year post-operatively. We hypothesize that the benefit of implant realignment is achieved through decreased soft tissue trauma as well as potentially greater predictability and sustainability of soft tissue balance than with soft tissue releases alone

Background. Discrepancies in patient outcomes after total knee arthroplasty have encouraged the development of different treatment options including early preventive interventions. In addition, improvements in surgical techniques and instrumentation have increased the accuracy of the surgeries. In this case study, we review the first robotic-arm assisted modular tricompartmental knee arthroplasty in which bone and soft tissues are conserved by employing a precise planning and execution technique. Materials and Methods. A 63 year old Caucasian female with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 27 presented to the surgeon (SK) with knee pain and a varus mechanical alignment. The patient received modular tri-unicompartmental arthroplasty performed with robotic-arm assistance; (see figure 1 for post-op radiograph). Range of Motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS) were measured pre-operatively and post-operatively at 6, 16, and 23 months. At 6 months post-op an in-depth in vivo kinematic analysis was conducted by using a validated fluoroscopic assessment technique [1]. The patient simulated stair climbing, kneeling activity, and deep lunge while under single plane fluoroscopy. Three dimensional models were created from CT scans and were matched to 2D fluoroscopic images for kinematic assessment. Results. ROM, KSS, KOOS improved post-operatively, see Table 1. Patient displayed tibial internal rotation and screw home mechanism like that of normal knees, (Figure 2). Anterior-posterior translation of medial and lateral compartments was observed (Figure 3). The patient demonstrated a maximum flexion of 115 and 114.9 in kneeling and lunge activity, respectively. Tibial external rotation was seen in both kneeling and lunging, although rotation was greater during the lunge activity (3.1 versus 11.5 degrees). Both medial and lateral compartments showed posterior translation during these activities (Table 2). Conclusion. Clinical, radiographic and functional outcomes were achieved for this patient. This case report was the first case of robotically assisted, modular, ACL and PCL sparing tricompartmental arthroplasty. It was anticipated that preserving more soft tissues, particularly the ACL would contribute to improved kinematic function of the knee following arthroplasty, which was the primary differentiating factor between a bicompartmental design and a traditional tricompartmental knee design. The use of robotic techonlogy as described herein has not yet been approved by the FDA

Introduction:. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been proven to be an effective treatment for degenerative joint disease confined to a single tibiofemoral compartment. Recently, UKAs have been performed with robotic-arm assistance (RAA) devices to build and improve upon previous computer-assisted navigation. As a pilot study, we have analyzed short term outcomes for a series of robotic-arm assisted medial UKAs and compared them to a comparable cohort of traditionally instrumented medial UKAs. Methods:. Ninety-eight fixed-bearing medial UKAs were isolated in our prospective data collection database for short-term analysis for this study. Included patients completed pre and post-operative Short Form 12 version 1 Health Survey (SF12), Western Ontario and McMaster University Outcome Scores (WOMAC), and Knee Society Function Score (KSFS) questionnaires. Forty-eight RAA UKAs were performed using the MAKO RIO system with Restoris implants, and fifty manual UKAs were performed with the Zimmer® Unicompartmental High-Flex Knee System (ZUK). Results:. Both cohorts experienced increased gains in all categories, except for the change in SF12 mental subscore in the MAKO cohort. Only the WOMAC pain subscore at 1 year showed statistically significant differences between the two cohorts, with MAKO subjects experiencing less pain than ZUK subjects (92.4 MAKO vs. 82.0 ZUK, p = 0.03). The SF12 mental score at three months and the change in SF12 mental score from pre-op to 1 year were also statistically significant; however, the pre-op differences between the two groups in the SF 12 mental category were also significantly different. Within the groups that were not significantly different, ZUK subjects experienced greater changes from pre-operative to three months in SF12 mental, all WOMAC subsets, and KSFS, while MAKO subjects had a greater change in SF12 physical subscore. This pattern held true with changes between pre-operative and 1 year, with the exception that MAKO patients experienced a greater positive change in WOMAC pain scores than ZUK patients. Additionally, age and body mass index were not significantly different between cohorts; however, operative time was significantly longer in the MAKO cohort (p < 0.001). Discussion:. These results suggest that despite the lower WOMAC pain scores at one year, the extra expense and operative time required for RAA UKA may not translate into immediate functional gains. These conclusions are however limited due to the short follow-up time period and the randomization of patients. Future studies must also analyze implant alignment, rotation and position in order to fully analyze the operations