we have previously reported that bone preparation is quite precise and accurate relative to a preoperative plan when using a robotic arm assisted technique for UKA. However, in that same study, we found a large variation between intended and final tibial implant position, presumably occuring during cement curing. In this study, we reviewed a subsequent cohort of patients in which the tibial and femoral components were cemented individually with ongoing evaluation of tibial component position during cement curing. Group 1 comprised the simultaneous cementing techniquegroup of patients, previously reported on, although their x-rays were re-analyzed. Group 2 consisted of the individual cementing technique cohort. All implants were identical, specifically a flat, inlay all-polyethylene tibial component. Postoperative x-rays from each cohort of patients were evaluated using image analysis software. Statistical evaluation was performed.INTRODUCTION
METHODS AND MATERIALS
