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. A per protocol analysis of 76 patients, 43 of whom underwent TKA and 34 of whom underwent bi-UKA, was performed from a prospective, single-centre, randomized controlled trial. Diaries kept by the patients recorded pain, function, and the use of analgesics daily throughout the first week and weekly between the second and sixth weeks. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared preoperatively, and at three months and one year postoperatively. Data were also compared longitudinally and a subgroup analysis was conducted, stratified by preoperative PROM status.Aims
Methods
Limb alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) influences periarticular soft-tissue tension, biomechanics through knee flexion, and implant survival. Despite this, there is no uniform consensus on the optimal alignment technique for TKA. Neutral mechanical alignment facilitates knee flexion and symmetrical component wear but forces the limb into an unnatural position that alters native knee kinematics through the arc of knee flexion. Kinematic alignment aims to restore native limb alignment, but the safe ranges with this technique remain uncertain and the effects of this alignment technique on component survivorship remain unknown. Anatomical alignment aims to restore predisease limb alignment and knee geometry, but existing studies using this technique are based on cadaveric specimens or clinical trials with limited follow-up times. Functional alignment aims to restore the native plane and obliquity of the joint by manipulating implant positioning while limiting soft tissue releases, but the results of high-quality studies with long-term outcomes are still awaited. The drawbacks of existing studies on alignment include the use of surgical techniques with limited accuracy and reproducibility of achieving the planned alignment, poor correlation of intraoperative data to long-term functional outcomes and implant survivorship, and a paucity of studies on the safe ranges of limb alignment. Further studies on alignment in TKA should use surgical adjuncts (e.g. robotic technology) to help execute the planned alignment with improved accuracy, include intraoperative assessments of knee biomechanics and periarticular soft-tissue tension, and correlate alignment to long-term functional outcomes and survivorship.
We performed a randomised controlled trial comparing
computer-assisted surgery (CAS) with conventional surgery (CONV)
in total knee replacement (TKR). Between 2009 and 2011 a total of
192 patients with a mean age of 68 years (55 to 85) with osteoarthritis
or arthritic disease of the knee were recruited from four Norwegian
hospitals. At three months follow-up, functional results were marginally
better for the CAS group. Mean differences (MD) in favour of CAS
were found for the Knee Society function score (MD: 5.9, 95% confidence
interval (CI) 0.3 to 11.4, p = 0.039), the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis
Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales for ‘pain’ (MD: 7.7, 95% CI 1.7 to
13.6, p = 0.012), ‘sports’ (MD: 13.5, 95% CI 5.6 to 21.4, p = 0.001)
and ‘quality of life’ (MD: 7.2, 95% CI 0.1 to 14.3, p = 0.046).
At one-year follow-up, differences favouring CAS were found for
KOOS ‘sports’ (MD: 11.0, 95% CI 3.0 to 19.0, p = 0.007) and KOOS
‘symptoms’ (MD: 6.7, 95% CI 0.5 to 13.0, p = 0.035). The use of
CAS resulted in fewer outliers in frontal alignment (>
3° malalignment),
both for the entire TKR (37.9% Cite this article:
Improvements in the surgical technique of total
knee replacement (TKR) are continually being sought. There has recently
been interest in three-dimensional (3D) pre-operative planning using
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and CT. The 3D images are increasingly
used for the production of patient-specific models, surgical guides
and custom-made implants for TKR. The users of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) claim that
they allow the optimum balance of technology and conventional surgery
by reducing the complexity of conventional alignment and sizing
tools. In this way the advantages of accuracy and precision claimed
by computer navigation techniques are achieved without the disadvantages
of additional intra-operative inventory, new skills or surgical
time. This review describes the terminology used in this area and debates
the advantages and disadvantages of PSI.
The aim of this prospective single-centre study
was to assess the difference in clinical outcome between total knee replacement
(TKR) using computerised navigation and that of conventional TKR.
We hypothesised that navigation would give a better result at every
stage within the first five years. A total of 195 patients (195
knees) with a mean age of 70.0 years (39 to 89) were allocated alternately
into two treatment groups, which used either conventional instrumentation
(group A, 97 knees) or a navigation system (group B, 98 knees).
After five years, complete clinical scores were available for 121
patients (62%). A total of 18 patients were lost to follow-up. Compared
with conventional surgery, navigated TKR resulted in a better mean
Knee Society score (p = 0.008). The difference in mean Knee Society
scores over time between the two groups was not constant (p = 0.006),
which suggests that these groups differed in their response to surgery
with time. No significant difference in the frequency of malalignment
was seen between the two groups. In summary, computerised navigation resulted in a better functional
outcome at five years than conventional techniques. Given the similarity
in mechanical alignment between the two groups, rotational alignment
may prove to be a better method of identifying differences in clinical
outcome after navigated surgery.
Correct positioning and alignment of components during primary total knee replacement (TKR) is widely accepted to be an important predictor of patient satisfaction and implant durability. This retrospective study reports the effect of the post-operative mechanical axis of the lower limb in the coronal plane on implant survival following primary TKR. A total of 501 TKRs in 396 patients were divided into an aligned group with a neutral mechanical axis (± 3°) and a malaligned group where the mechanical axis deviated from neutral by >
3°. At 15 years’ follow-up, 33 of 458 (7.2%) TKRs were revised for aseptic loosening. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a weak tendency towards improved survival with restoration of a neutral mechanical axis, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.47). We found that the relationship between survival of a primary TKR and mechanical axis alignment is weaker than that described in a number of previous reports.
We previously compared the component alignment in total knee replacement using a