Image-free handheld robotic-assisted technology improved the accuracy of implant positioning compared to conventional instrumentation in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty, without additional benefits in improvement of clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes in patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty (SB-TKA) using either robotic-assisted TKA (RA-TKA) or conventional TKA (C-TKA). METHODS: Included were the patients who underwent SB-TKA between January 2018 and January 2020 and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Of 151 patients included, 117 patients were operated using an image-free handheld robotic sculpting system (RA-TKA group) and 34 patients operated using conventional instrumentation (C-TKA group). The key outcomes noted were multiple patient-reported outcomes (PROs), adverse events, and radiological outcomes. Two investigators independently measured the radiological outcomes on pre- and post-operative radiographs in coronal plane (medial proximal tibial angle [MPTA] and anatomic lateral distal femoral angle [aLDFA]) and sagittal plane (posterior tibial slope [PTS] and posterior condylar offset [PCO]). The chi-square test was used to examine categorical variables. Student's t test was used to analyze the continuous variables. RESULTS: Patients in both groups were similar in baseline characteristics (gender, body mass index, incidence of comorbidities, and length of hospital stay) except that RA-TKA group patients younger (66.7 ± 8.9 vs 70.4 ± 10.5, P = 0.037) than C-TKA group. The operative time was longer in RA-TKA group as compared to C-TKA (189.3 ± 37.1 vs 175.0 ± 28.2, P = 0.040). The final PROs at each were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). The values of PROs at final follow-up in RA-TKA compared to C-TKA were VAS pain (0.4 ± 0.9 vs 0.4 ± 0.5), KOOS-JR (89.3 ± 5.8 vs 87.1 ± 5.3), and physical (55.9 ± 2.8 vs 55.4 ± 3.2), mental (61.1 ± 4.4 vs 60.2 ± 4.7) component of VR-12 scores, and KSS satisfaction (37.5 ± 1.1 vs 37.1 ± 2.2) (all P > 0.50 or non-significant [n.s.]). While one patient in RA-TKA required revision of femoral component for peri-prosthetic fracture, none of the patient in conventional group were revised (0.85% vs 0%, P = n.s.). The proportion of patients with outliers in RA-TKA group was lower for aLDFA (2.6% vs 22.1%, P < 0.01) and PTS (0% vs 35%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: This comparative study in patients undergoing SB-TKA found reduction of outliers in femoral and tibial implant positioning with RA-TKA as compared to C-TKA. There were no differences in both groups for pain, function, and satisfaction at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III Therapeutic Study.

COMPARATIVE STUDY on the MANAGEMENT of GLENOHUMERAL JOINT DISLOCATION. Closed Reduction vs. Arthroscopic Remplissage with Bankart Lesion Repair.

BACKGROUND: Conservative treatment of posttraumatic anteroinferior shoulder instability leads to a high failure rate and consequently high recurrence in young and active population. Each recurrence can increase the structural damage of both bony structures and soft tissues (Hill-Sachs lesion, Bankart lesion). Remplissage technique combined with Bankart repair have been proposed as a treatment option. HYPOTHESIS: Early arthroscopic treatment for shoulder dislocation will result in better outcome and lower recurrence rate than nonoperative management. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 60 cases from 2010 to 2015 treated by remplissage technique with Bankart repair or closed reduction for anterior shoulder dislocation. All surgeries and closed reductions were done by the same surgeon. Mean age of patients was 30 years, most of them males having experienced one or more recurrent dislocations; mean follow-up was 2 years. Patients with Hill-Sachs lesions < 40% on the articular surface and < 20% of bone defect in the glenoid cavity were included. Exclusion criteria were: glenohumeral arthritis or other inflammation, fracture around the shoulder joint, elderly patients with osteoporosis. All patients included in the study were followed up after 6, 12 and 24 months. Rowe score was used to assess the stability of the shoulders and goniometry to assess the range of motion of the glenohumeral joints. RESULTS: The results confirm that the remplissage technique with Bankart repair takes the upper hand over the conservative management and does not produce any severe adverse effect on postoperative shoulder range of motion. A slight restriction (≈10º) observed in external rotation did not prevent 69% of patients from resuming their preinjury sports activities. At the last follow-up, 90% of patients had a stable shoulder. Conservative management was associated with high rate of recurrence limiting the daily activity of our patients and interfering with their return to sports activities. Except from the recurrence of glenohumeral instability, no patient had a complication following arthroscopic Hill-Sachs remplissage. CONCLUSION: Conservative management after anterior shoulder dislocation including immobilization in neutral position leads to significantly higher and unacceptable high failure rate compared with early arthroscopic remplissage with Bankart repair. The slight restriction in external rotation post remplissage does not significantly affect the quality of life and return to sports activities and further supports the use of this safe, relatively short procedure, in the management of glenohumeral instability with concurrent Hill-Sachs lesions.