Aims. The primary aim of this study was to compare the postoperative systemic inflammatory response in conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty (conventional TKA) versus robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (robotic TKA). Secondary aims were to compare the macroscopic soft tissue injury, femoral and tibial bone trauma, localized thermal response, and the accuracy of component positioning between the two treatment groups. Methods. This prospective randomized controlled trial included 30 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee undergoing conventional TKA versus robotic TKA. Predefined serum markers of inflammation and localized knee temperature were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at six hours, day 1, day 2, day 7, and day 28 following TKA. Blinded observers used the Macroscopic Soft Tissue Injury (MASTI) classification system to grade intraoperative periarticular soft tissue injury and bone trauma. Plain radiographs were used to assess the accuracy of achieving the planned postioning of the components in both groups. Results. Patients undergoing conventional TKA and robotic TKA had comparable changes in the postoperative systemic inflammatory and localized thermal response at six hours, day 1, day 2, and day 28 after surgery. Robotic TKA had significantly reduced levels of interleukin-6 (p < 0.001), tumour necrosis factor-α (p = 0.021), ESR (p = 0.001), CRP (p = 0.004), lactate dehydrogenase (p = 0.007), and creatine kinase (p = 0.004) at day 7 after surgery compared with conventional TKA. Robotic TKA was associated with significantly improved preservation of the periarticular soft tissue envelope (p < 0.001), and reduced femoral (p = 0.012) and tibial (p = 0.023) bone trauma compared with conventional TKA. Robotic TKA significantly improved the accuracy of achieving the planned limb alignment (p < 0.001), femoral component positioning (p < 0.001), and tibial component positioning (p < 0.001) compared with conventional TKA. Conclusion. Robotic TKA was associated with a transient reduction in the early (day 7) postoperative inflammatory response but there was no difference in the immediate (< 48 hours) or late (day 28) postoperative systemic inflammatory response compared with conventional TKA. Robotic TKA was associated with decreased iatrogenic periarticular soft tissue injury, reduced femoral and tibial bone trauma, and improved accuracy of component positioning compared with conventional TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):113–122

Aims

To map literature on prognostic factors related to outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), to identify extensively studied factors and to guide future research into what domains need further exploration.

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.

We analysed the serum C-reactive protein level, synovial fluid obtained by joint aspiration and five synovial biopsies from 145 knee replacements prior to revision to assess the value of these parameters in diagnosing late peri-prosthetic infection. Five further synovial biopsies were used for histological analysis. Samples were also obtained during the revision and incubated and analysed in an identical manner for 14 days.

A total of 40 total knee replacements were found to be infected (prevalence 27.6%). The aspiration technique had a sensitivity of 72.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 58.7 to 86.3), a specificity of 95.2% (95% CI 91.2 to 99.2), a positive predictive value of 85.3% (95% CI 73.4 to 100), a negative predictive value of 90.1% (95% CI 84.5 to 95.7) and an accuracy of 89%. The biopsy technique had a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 98.1% (95% CI 95.5 to 100), a positive predictive value of 95.2% (95% CI 88.8 to 100), a negative predictive value of 100% and an accuracy of 98.6%. C-reactive protein with a cut-off-point of 13.5 mg/l had a sensitivity of 72.5% (95% CI 58.7 to 86.3), a specificity of 80.9% (95% CI 73.4 to 88.4), a positive predictive value of 59.2% (95% CI 45.4 to 73.0), a negative predictive value of 88.5% (95% 81.0 to 96.0 CI) and an accuracy of 78.1%.

We found that biopsy was superior to joint aspiration and C-reactive protein in the diagnosis of late peri-prosthetic infection of total knee replacements.