Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has a higher risk of revision than total knee arthroplasty, particularly for low volume surgeons. The recent introduction of robotic-arm assisted systems has allowed for increased accuracy, however new systems typically have learning curves. The objective of this study was to determine the learning curve of a robotic-arm assisted system for UKA.

Methods A total of 152 consecutive robotic-arm assisted primary medial UKA were performed by five surgeons between 2017 and 2021. Operative times, implant positioning, reoperations and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS; Oxford Knee Score, EuroQol-5D, and Forgotten Joint Score) were recorded.

There was a learning curve of 11 cases with the system that was associated with increased operative time (13 minutes, p<0.01) and improved insert sizing over time (p=0.03). There was no difference in implant survival (98.2%) between learning and proficiency phases (p = 0.15), and no difference in survivorship between ‘high’ and ‘low’ usage surgeons (p = 0.23) at 36 months. There were no differences in PROMS related to the learning curve. This suggested that the learning curve did not lead to early adverse effects in this patient cohort.

The introduction of a robotic-arm assisted UKA system led to learning curves for operative time and implant sizing, but there was no effect on patient outcomes at early follow- up. The short learning curve was independent of UKA usage and indicated that robotic-arm assisted UKA may be particularly useful for low-usage surgeons.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is associated with a higher risk of revision compared with total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The outcomes of knee arthroplasty are typically presented as implant survival or incidence of revision after a set number of years, which can be difficult for patients and clinicians to conceptualise. We aimed to calculate the ‘lifetime risk’ of revision for UKA as a more relatable estimate of risk projection over a patient's remaining lifetime, and make comparisons to TKA. All primary UKAS performed from 1999 to 2019 (n=13,481) captured by the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR) were included. The lifetime risk of revision was calculated and stratified by age, gender and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status. The lifetime risk of revision for UKA was highest in the youngest patients (46-50 years; 40.4%) and lowest in the oldest patients (86-90 years; 3.7%). Lifetime risk of revision was higher for females (range 4.3%-43.4% cf. males 2.9%-37.4%) and patients with higher ASA status (ASA 3-4 range 8.8%-41.2% cf. ASA 1 1.8%-29.8%), regardless of age. The lifetime risk of UKA was two-fold higher than TKA (ranging from 3.7%-40.4% UKA, 1.6%-22.4% TKA) across all age groups. Increased risk of revision in the younger patients was associated with aseptic loosening in both males and females, and pain in females. Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) accounted for 4% of all UKA revisions, in contrast to 27% for TKA; risk of PJI was higher for males than females for both procedures. The lifetime risk of revision is a more meaningful measure of arthroplasty outcomes and can aid with patient counselling prior to UKA. Findings from this study show the increased lifetime risk of UKA revision for younger patients, females and those with higher ASA status.

Surgical repair of rotator cuff tears have high failure rates (20–70%), often due to a lack of biological healing. Augmenting repairs with extracellular matrix-based scaffolds is a common option for surgeons, although to date, no commercially available product has proven to be effective. In this study, a novel collagen scaffold was assessed for its efficacy in augmenting rotator cuff repair. The collagen scaffold was assessed in vitro for cytocompatability and retention of tenocyte phenotype using alamarBLUE assays, confocal imaging and real-time PCR. Immunogenicity was assessed in vitro by the activation of pre-macrophage cells. In vivo, using a modified rat rotator cuff defect model, supraspinatus tendon repairs were carried out in 46 animals. Overlay augmentation with the collagen scaffold was compared to unaugmented repairs. At 6- and 12-weeks post-op the repairs were tested biomechanically to evaluate repair strength, and histologically for quality of healing. The collagen scaffold supported human tenocyte growth in vitro, with cells appearing morphologically tenocytic and expressing higher tendon gene markers compared to plastic controls. No immunogenic responses were provoked compared to suture material control. In vivo, augmentation with the scaffold improved the histological scores at 12 weeks (8.37/15 vs. 6.43/15, p=0.0317). However, no significant difference was detected on mechanical testing. While the collagen scaffold improved the quality of healing of the tendon, a meaningful increase in biomechanical strength was not achieved. This is likely due to its inability to affect the bone-tendon junction. Future materials/orthobiologics must target both the repaired tendon and the regenerating bone-tendon junction.