The knee is one of the most commonly affected joints in osteoarthritis. Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKA) was developed to address patients with this disease in only one compartment. The conventional knee arthroplasty jigs, while usually being accurate, may result in the prosthesis being inserted in an undesired alignment which may lead to poor post-operative outcomes. Common modes of failure in UKA include edge loading due to incorrect sizing or positioning, development of disease in the other compartment due to over-stuffing or over-correction and early loosening or stress fractures due to inaccurate bone cuts.

Computer navigation and robotically assisted unicompartmental knee replacement were introduced in order to improve the surgical accuracy of both the femoral and tibial bone cuts. The aim of this study was to assess accuracy and reliability of robotic assisted, unicondylar knee surgery in producing reported bony alignment.

Two hundred and twenty consecutive patients with a mean age of 64 + 11 years who underwent successful medial robotic assisted unicondylar knee surgery performed by two senior total joint arthroplasty surgeons were identified retrospectively. The mean body mass index of the cohort was 33.5 + 8 kg/m² with a minimum follow-up of 6 months (range: 6–18 months). Femoral and tibial sagittal and coronal alignments as well as the posterior slope of the tibial component were measured in the post-operative radiographs. These measurements were compared with the equivalent measurements collected during intra-operative period by the navigation to study the reliability and accuracy of femoral and tibial cuts. Radiographic evaluation was independently conducted by two observers.

There was an average difference of 2.2 to 3.6 degrees between the intra-operatively planned and post-operative radiological equivalent measurements. For the femur, mean varus/valgus angulation was 2.8 + 2.5 degrees with 83% of those measured within 5% of planned. For the tibia mean varus/valgus angulation was 2.4 + 1.9 degrees with 93% within 5% of planned resection. There was minimal inter-observer variability between radiographic measurements. There were no infections in the evaluated group at the time of radiographic examination.

Alignment for unicondylar knee arthroplasty is important for implant survival and is a more difficult procedure to instrument as it is a minimally invasive surgery. Assuming appropriate planning, robotically assisted surgery in unicondylar knee replacement will result in reliably accurate positioning of component and reduce early component failures caused by malpositioning. A mismatch between pre-planning and post-operative radiography is often caused by poor cementing technique of the prosthesis rather than incorrect bony cuts. Addressing these factors can lead to greater success and improved outcomes for patients.

Osteoarthritis of the knee is a debilitating condition affecting millions of persons, often requiring arthroplasty to relieve pain and improve mobility. For those patients with disease in only one compartment of the knee, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) can be a viable surgical alternative. To date, there has not been a large series reported in the literature of UKAs performed with robotic assistance. The aim of this study was to examine the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent this procedure.

Five hundred and ten procedures in patients with a mean age of 63.7 years (range, 28 to 88 years) who underwent unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using a robotic-assisted system between July, 2008 and June, 2010 were identified. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score and patients without recent follow-up were contacted by telephone. The revision rate and time to revision were also examined.

The average length of stay for patients who underwent robot-assisted UKA was 1.4 days (range, 1 to 7 days). There was minimal blood loss with most procedures. At latest clinical follow-up, most patients were doing well after UKA with a mean Oxford Knee Score of 36.1 + 9.92. The revision rate was 2.5% with 13 patients being either converted from an inlay to onlay prosthesis or conversion to total knee arthroplasty. The most common indication for revision was tibial component loosening, followed by progression of arthritis. Mean time to revision was 9.55 + 5.48 months (range, 1 to 19 months).

Unicompartmental arthroplasty with a robotic system provides good pain relief and functional outcome at short-term follow-up. Ensuring correct component alignment and ligament balancing increases the probability of a favorable outcome following surgery. Proper patient selection for appropriate UKA candidates remains an important factor for successful outcomes.

INTRODUCTION

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) allows replacement of a single compartment in patients who have isolated osteoarthritis as a minimally invasive procedure. However, limited visualization of the surgical site provides challenges in ensuring accurate alignment and placement of the prosthesis.

With robot-assisted surgery, correct implant positioning and ligament balancing are obtainable with increased accuracy. To date, there has not been a large series reported in the literature of UKAs performed with robotic assistance. The aim of this study was to examine the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted UKA patients.

The conventional Knee arthroplasty jigs, while being usually accurate, often result in prostheses being inserted in an undesired alignment resulting in poor postoperative outcome. This is especially true about unicompartmental knee replacement. Computer navigation and roboticaly assisted unicompartmental knee replacement were introduced in order to improve surgical accuracy of the femoral and tibial bone cuts.

The aim of this study was to assess accuracy and reliability of robotic assisted, unicondylar knee surgery (Makoplasty) in producing reported bony alignment. Two hundred and twenty consecutive patients who underwent medial robotic assisted unicondylar knee surgery (Makoplasty) performed by two surgeons (RJ & GP) were retrospectively identified and included in the study. Femoral and tibial sagittal and coronal alignments and posterior slope of the tibial component were measured in the post-operative radiographs. These measurements were compared with the equivalent measurements collected during intra-operative period by the navigation to study the reliability and accuracy of femoral and tibial cuts.

The efficacy of β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) loaded with bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2)-gene-modified bone-marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) was evaluated for the repair of experimentally-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head in goats.

Bilateral early-stage osteonecrosis was induced in adult goats three weeks after ligation of the lateral and medial circumflex arteries and delivery of liquid nitrogen into the femoral head. After core decompression, porous β-TCP loaded with BMP-2 gene- or β-galactosidase (gal)-gene-transduced BMSCs was implanted into the left and right femoral heads, respectively. At 16 weeks after implantation, there was collapse of the femoral head in the untreated group but not in the BMP-2 or β-gal groups. The femoral heads in the BMP-2 group had a normal density and surface, while those in the β-gal group presented with a low density and an irregular surface. Histologically, new bone and fibrous tissue were formed in the macropores of the β-TCP. Sixteen weeks after implantation, lamellar bone had formed in the BMP-2 group, but there were some empty cavities and residual fibrous tissue in the β-gal group. The new bone volume in the BMP-2 group was significantly higher than that in the β-gal group. The maximum compressive strength and Young’s modulus of the repaired tissue in the BMP-2 group were similar to those of normal bone and significantly higher than those in the β-gal group.

Our findings indicate that porous β-TCP loaded with BMP-2-gene-transduced BMSCs are capable of repairing early-stage, experimentally-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head and of restoring its mechanical function.