Aims. Ideal component sizing may be difficult to achieve in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Anatomical variants, incremental implant size, and a reduced surgical exposure may lead to over- or under-sizing of the components. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of UKA sizing with robotic-assisted techniques versus a conventional surgical technique. Methods. Three groups of 93 medial UKAs were assessed. The first group was performed by a conventional technique, the second group with an image-free robotic-assisted system (Image-Free group), and the last group with an image-based robotic arm-assisted system, using a preoperative CT scan (Image-Based group). There were no demographic differences between groups. We compared six parameters on postoperative radiographs to assess UKA sizing. Incorrect sizing was defined by an over- or under-sizing greater than 3 mm. Results. There was a higher rate of tibial under-sizing posteriorly in the conventional group compared to robotic-assisted groups (47.3% (n = 44) in conventional group, 29% (n = 27) in Image-Free group, 6.5% (n = 6) in Image-Based group; p < 0.001), as well as a higher rate of femoral under-sizing posteriorly (30.1% (n = 28) in conventional group, 7.5% (n = 7) in Image-Free group, 12.9% (n = 12) in Image-Based group; p < 0.001). The posterior femoral offset was more often increased in the conventional group, especially in comparison to the Image-Based group (43% (n = 40) in conventional group, 30.1% (n = 28) in Image-Free group, 8.6% (n = 8) in Image-Based group; p < 0.001). There was no significant overhang of the femoral or tibial implant in any groups. Conclusion. Robotic-assisted surgical techniques for medial UKA decrease the risk of tibial and femoral under-sizing, particularly with an image-based system using a preoperative CT scan. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):610–618

Aims. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) is theoretically more accurate for component positioning than TKA performed with mechanical instruments (M-TKA). Furthermore, the ability to incorporate soft-tissue laxity data into the plan prior to bone resection should reduce variability between the planned polyethylene thickness and the final implanted polyethylene. The purpose of this study was to compare accuracy to plan for component positioning and precision, as demonstrated by deviation from plan for polyethylene insert thickness in measured-resection RA-TKA versus M-TKA. Methods. A total of 220 consecutive primary TKAs between May 2016 and November 2018, performed by a single surgeon, were reviewed. Planned coronal plane component alignment and overall limb alignment were all 0° to the mechanical axis; tibial posterior slope was 2°; and polyethylene thickness was 9 mm. For RA-TKA, individual component position was adjusted to assist gap-balancing but planned coronal plane alignment for the femoral and tibial components and overall limb alignment remained 0 ± 3°; planned tibial posterior slope was 1.5°. Mean deviations from plan for each parameter were compared between groups for positioning and size and outliers were assessed. Results. In all, 103 M-TKAs and 96 RA-TKAs were included. In RA-TKA versus M-TKA, respectively: mean femoral positioning (0.9° (SD 1.2°) vs 1.7° (SD 1.1°)), mean tibial positioning (0.3° (SD 0.9°) vs 1.3° (SD 1.0°)), mean posterior tibial slope (-0.3° (SD 1.3°) vs 1.7° (SD 1.1°)), and mean mechanical axis limb alignment (1.0° (SD 1.7°) vs 2.7° (SD 1.9°)) all deviated significantly less from the plan (all p < 0.001); significantly fewer knees required a distal femoral recut (10 (10%) vs 22 (22%), p = 0.033); and deviation from planned polyethylene thickness was significantly less (1.4 mm (SD 1.6) vs 2.7 mm (SD 2.2), p < 0.001). Conclusion. RA-TKA is significantly more accurate and precise in planning both component positioning and final polyethylene insert thickness. Future studies should investigate whether this increased accuracy and precision has an impact on clinical outcomes. The greater accuracy and reproducibility of RA-TKA may be important as precise new goals for component positioning are developed and can be further individualized to the patient. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):74–80

Aims. Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) promises accurate implant placement with the potential of improved survival and functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to present the current evidence for robotic-assisted UKA and describe the outcome in terms of implant positioning, range of movement (ROM), function and survival, and the types of robot and implants that are currently used. Materials and Methods. A search of PubMed and Medline was performed in October 2018 in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. Search terms included “robotic”, “knee”, and “surgery”. The criteria for inclusion was any study describing the use of robotic UKA and reporting implant positioning, ROM, function, and survival for clinical, cadaveric, or dry bone studies. Results. A total of 528 articles were initially identified from the databases and reference lists. Following full text screening, 38 studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria were included. In all, 20 studies reported on implant positioning, 18 on functional outcomes, 16 on survivorship, and six on ROM. The Mako (Stryker, Mahwah, New Jersey) robot was used in 32 studies (84%), the BlueBelt Navio (Blue Belt Technologies, Plymouth, Minnesota) in three (8%), the Sculptor RGA (Stanmore Implants, Borehamwood United Kingdom) in two (5%), and the Acrobot (The Acrobot Co. Ltd., London, United Kingdom) in one study (3%). The most commonly used implant was the Restoris MCK (Stryker). Nine studies (24%) did not report the implant that was used. The pooled survivorship at six years follow-up was 96%. However, when assessing survival according to implant design, survivorship of an inlay (all-polyethylene) tibial implant was 89%, whereas that of an onlay (metal-backed) implant was 97% at six years (odds ratio 3.66, 95% confidence interval 20.7 to 6.46, p < 0.001). Conclusion. There is little description of the choice of implant when reporting robotic-assisted UKA, which is essential when assessing survivorship, in the literature. Implant positioning with robotic-assisted UKA is more accurate and more reproducible than that performed manually and may offer better functional outcomes, but whether this translates into improved implant survival in the mid- to longer-term remains to be seen. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:838–847

Aims. The aim was to assess whether robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) had greater knee-specific outcomes, improved fulfilment of expectations, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and patient satisfaction when compared with manual TKA (mTKA). Methods. A randomized controlled trial was undertaken (May 2019 to December 2021), and patients were allocated to either mTKA or rTKA. A total of 100 patients were randomized, 50 to each group, of whom 43 rTKA and 38 mTKA patients were available for review at 12 months following surgery. There were no statistically significant preoperative differences between the groups. The minimal clinically important difference in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score was defined as 7.5 points. Results. There were no clinically or statistically significant differences between the knee-specific measures (WOMAC, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS)) or HRQoL measures (EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) and EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS)) at 12 months between the groups. However, the rTKA group had significantly (p = 0.029) greater improvements in the WOMAC pain component (mean difference 9.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0 to 18.4) over the postoperative period (two, six, and 12 months), which was clinically meaningful. This was not observed for function (p = 0.248) or total (p = 0.147) WOMAC scores. The rTKA group was significantly (p = 0.039) more likely to have expectation of ‘Relief of daytime pain in the joint’ when compared with the mTKA group. There were no other significant differences in expectations met between the groups. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction with their knee (p = 0.464), return to work (p = 0.464), activities (p = 0.293), or pain (p = 0.701). Conclusion. Patients undergoing rTKA had a clinically meaningful greater improvement in their knee pain over the first 12 months, and were more likely to have fulfilment of their expectation of daytime pain relief compared with patients undergoing mTKA. However, rTKA was not associated with a clinically significant greater knee-specific function or HRQoL, according to current definitions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5):450–459

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in order to determine the changes in the anatomy of the knee and alignment of the lower limb following surgery. Methods. An analysis of 38 patients who underwent TKA and 32 who underwent bi-UKA was performed as a secondary study from a prospective, single-centre, randomized controlled trial. CT imaging was used to measure coronal, sagittal, and axial alignment of the knee preoperatively and at three months postoperatively to determine changes in anatomy that had occurred as a result of the surgery. The hip-knee-ankle angle (HKAA) was also measured to identify any differences between the two groups. Results. The pre- to postoperative changes in joint anatomy were significantly less in patients undergoing bi-UKA in all three planes in both the femur and tibia, except for femoral sagittal component orientation in which there was no difference. Overall, for the six parameters of alignment (three femoral and three tibial), 47% of bi-UKAs and 24% TKAs had a change of < 2° (p = 0.045). The change in HKAA towards neutral in varus and valgus knees was significantly less in patients undergoing bi-UKA compared with those undergoing TKA (p < 0.001). Alignment was neutral in those undergoing TKA (mean 179.5° (SD 3.2°)) while those undergoing bi-UKA had mild residual varus or valgus alignment (mean 177.8° (SD 3.4°)) (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Robotic-assisted, cruciate-sparing bi-UKA maintains the natural anatomy of the knee in the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes better, and may therefore preserve normal joint kinematics, compared with a mechanically aligned TKA. This includes preservation of coronal joint line obliquity. HKAA alignment was corrected towards neutral significantly less in patients undergoing bi-UKA, which may represent restoration of the pre-disease constitutional alignment (p < 0.001). Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1511–1518

Aims. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using functional alignment aims to implant the components with minimal compromise of the soft-tissue envelope by restoring the plane and obliquity of the non-arthritic joint. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of TKA with functional alignment on mediolateral soft-tissue balance as assessed using intraoperative sensor-guided technology. Methods. This prospective study included 30 consecutive patients undergoing robotic-assisted TKA using the Stryker PS Triathlon implant with functional alignment. Intraoperative soft-tissue balance was assessed using sensor-guided technology after definitive component implantation; soft-tissue balance was defined as intercompartmental pressure difference (ICPD) of < 15 psi. Medial and lateral compartment pressures were recorded at 10°, 45°, and 90° of knee flexion. This study included 18 females (60%) and 12 males (40%) with a mean age of 65.2 years (SD 9.3). Mean preoperative hip-knee-ankle deformity was 6.3° varus (SD 2.7°). Results. TKA with functional alignment achieved balanced medial and lateral compartment pressures at 10° (25.0 psi (SD 6.1) vs 23.1 psi (SD 6.7), respectively; p = 0.140), 45° (21.4 psi (SD 5.9) vs 20.6 psi (SD 5.9), respectively; p = 0.510), and 90° (21.2 psi (SD 7.1) vs 21.6 psi (SD 9.0), respectively; p = 0.800) of knee flexion. Mean ICPD was 6.1 psi (SD 4.5; 0 to 14) at 10°, 5.4 psi (SD 3.9; 0 to 12) at 45°, and 4.9 psi (SD 4.45; 0 to 15) at 90° of knee flexion. Mean postoperative limb alignment was 2.2° varus (SD 1.0°). Conclusion. TKA using the functional alignment achieves balanced mediolateral soft-tissue tension through the arc of knee flexion as assessed using intraoperative pressure-sensor technology. Further clinical trials are required to determine if TKA with functional alignment translates to improvements in patient satisfaction and outcomes compared to conventional alignment techniques. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):507–514

Aims. The aim of this study was to analyze the true costs associated with preoperative CT scans performed for robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) planning and to determine the value of a formal radiologist’s report of these studies. Methods. We reviewed 194 CT reports of 176 sequential patients who underwent primary RATKA by a single surgeon at a suburban teaching hospital. CT radiology reports were reviewed for the presence of incidental findings that might change the management of the patient. Payments for the scans, including the technical and professional components, for 330 patients at two hospitals were also recorded and compared. Results. There were 82 incidental findings in 61 CT studies, one of which led to a recommendation for additional testing. Across both institutions, the mean total payment for a preoperative scan was $446 ($8 to $3,870). The mean patient payment was $71 ($0 to $2,690). There was wide variation in payments between the institutions. In Institution A, the mean total payment was $258 ($168 to $264), with a mean patient payment of $57 ($0 to $100). The mean technical payment in this institution was $211 ($8 to $856), while the mean professional payment was $48 ($0 to $66). In Institution B, the mean total payment was $636 ($37 to $3,870), with a mean patient payment of $85 ($0 to $2,690). Conclusion. The total cost of a CT scan is low and a minimal part of the overall cost of the RATKA. No incidental findings identified on imaging led to a change in management, suggesting that the professional component could be eliminated to reduce costs. Further studies need to take into account the patient perspective and the wide variation in total costs and patient payments across institutions and insurances. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):79–84

Aims

The primary aim was to assess whether robotic total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) had a greater early knee-specific outcome when compared to manual TKA (mTKA). Secondary aims were to assess whether rTKA was associated with improved expectation fulfilment, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and patient satisfaction when compared to mTKA.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare a bicruciate-retaining (BCR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with a posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) TKA design in terms of kinematics, measured using fluoroscopy and stability as micromotion using radiostereometric analysis (RSA).

Aims

Intraoperative pressure sensors allow surgeons to quantify soft-tissue balance during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to determine whether using sensors to achieve soft-tissue balance was more effective than manual balancing in improving outcomes in TKA.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare any differences in the primary outcome (biphasic flexion knee moment during gait) of robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at one year post-surgery.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) during the first six weeks and at one year postoperatively.

Aims

Neither a surgeon’s intraoperative impression nor the parameters of computer navigation have been shown to be predictive of the outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to determine whether a surgeon, with robotic assistance, can predict the outcome as assessed using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for pain (KPS), one year postoperatively, and establish what factors correlate with poor KOOS scores in a well-aligned and balanced TKA.

Aims

Alternative alignment concepts, including kinematic and restricted kinematic, have been introduced to help improve clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical results, along with patient satisfaction, following TKA using the concept of restricted kinematic alignment.

Aims

This study aims to determine the proportion of patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA) possibly suitable for partial (PKA) or combined partial knee arthroplasty (CPKA) according to patterns of full-thickness cartilage loss and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) status.

Aim

There has been a significant reduction in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) procedures recorded in Australia. This follows several national joint registry studies documenting high UKA revision rates when compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). With the recent introduction of robotically assisted UKA procedures, it is hoped that outcomes improve. This study examines the cumulative revision rate of UKA procedures implanted with a newly introduced robotic system and compares the results to one of the best performing non-robotically assisted UKA prostheses, as well as all other non-robotically assisted UKA procedures.

Aims

The removal of the cruciate ligaments in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been suggested as a potential contributing factor to patient dissatisfaction, due to alteration of the in vivo biomechanics of the knee. Bicruciate retaining (BCR) TKA allows the preservation of the cruciate ligaments, thus offering the potential to reproduce healthy kinematics. The aim of this study was to compare in vivo kinematics between the operated and contralateral knee in patients who have undergone TKA with a contemporary BCR design.

Aims

The objectives of this study were to compare postoperative pain, analgesia requirements, inpatient functional rehabilitation, time to hospital discharge, and complications in patients undergoing conventional jig-based unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) versus robotic-arm assisted UKA.

Aims

The objective of this study was to compare early postoperative functional outcomes and time to hospital discharge between conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and robotic-arm assisted TKA.