Early and delayed periprosthetic joint infection in robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has significantly improved knee surgery outcomes in the last few years. However, its association with the periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rate remains debatable. This study investigates the incidence of early and delayed PJI in a multicentric cohort of patients who underwent RA-TKA, aiming to elucidate the risk associated with this procedure. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed data from a consecutive series of patients who underwent RA-TKA using the NAVIO Surgical System (Smith & Nephew, Memphis, USA) between 2020 and 2023. The inclusion criteria encompassed individuals over 18 years of age with a minimum follow-up period of three months. The primary outcome was the incidence of early and delayed PJI, defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) diagnostic criteria. Secondary outcomes included the evaluation of postoperative complications. RESULTS: The study included patients who underwent RA-TKA with the NAVIO system, achieving an average follow-up of 9.1 ± 3.9 months. None of the patients met the EBJIS criteria for a likely or confirmed infection, indicating an absence of both early and delayed PJI cases. Two patients required subsequent surgical interventions due to patellar maltracking and prosthetic loosening, respectively. Additionally, three patients underwent passive manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate no evidence of early or delayed PJI in patients undergoing RA-TKA within the study period. The low complication rate further supports the reliability and safety of this surgical technique in short-term follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Comparable accuracy of femoral joint line reconstruction in different kinematic and functional alignment techniques.

PURPOSE: A key part of kinematic alignment (KA) and functional alignment (FA) is to restore the natural femoral joint line, in particular the medial joint line. KA is known to reproduce the femoral joint line accurately; however, direct comparisons with other surgical techniques such as FA are currently lacking. The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences of alignment parameters in KA and FA techniques with a special focus given to the femoral joint line. METHODS: We performed a retrospective radiological analysis of pre- and postoperative long leg radiographs of 221 consecutive patients with varus or neutral leg alignment, who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures from 2018 to 2020. Patients were assigned to one of four groups: (1) FA: image-based robotic-assisted TKA, (2) FA: imageless robotic-assisted TKA, (3): restricted KA: 3D cutting block-assisted (patient-specific instruments, PSI) TKA, (4): unrestricted KA: calipered technique. Patients' radiographs were (re)-analyzed for overall limb alignment, medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), as well as medial and lateral femoral joint line alteration. Statistical significance was determined using unpaired t testing (FA vs. KA group) and one-way ANOVA (subgroup analyses). RESULTS: Comparisons of KA vs. FA, as well as individual subgroups of KA and FA did not show any differences in the accuracy of medial joint line reconstruction (< 2 mm, p = 0.384, p = 0.744, respectively) and LDFA alteration (< 2°, p = 0.997, 0.921, respectively). Correction of MPTA (3.4° vs. 2.2°) and lateral femoral joint line (2.1 mm vs. 1.5 mm) was higher for FA and FA subgroups compared to KA and KA subgroups (both p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Kinematic and functional alignments showed a comparable accuracy in reconstruction of the medial femoral joint line and femoral joint line orientation. Increased correction of MPTA and lateral femoral joint line was recorded with FA techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Improved accuracy of implant placement with an imageless handheld robotic system compared to conventional instrumentation in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial using CT-based assessment of radiological outcomes.

PURPOSE: Image-free handheld robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) has shown to achieve desired limb alignment compared to conventional jig-based instrumented total knee arthroplasty (CTKA). The aim of this prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the accuracy of a semi-autonomous imageless handheld RATKA compared to CTKA in order to achieve the perioperative planned target alignment of the knee postoperatively. METHODS: Fifty-two patients with knee osteoarthritis were randomized in 1:1 ratio to undergo unilateral CTKA or an imageless handheld RATKA. A full-length lower limb CT-scan was obtained pre- and 6-week postoperative. The primary outcomes were radiologic measurements of achieved target hip-knee-ankle axis (HKA-axis) and implant component position including varus and external rotation and flexion of the femur component, and posterior tibial slope. The proportion of outliers in above radiographic outcomes, defined as > 3° deviation in postoperative CT measurements as compared to perioperative planned target, were also noted. Knee phenotypes were compared with use of the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification. RESULTS: Baseline conditions were comparable between both groups. The overall proportion and percentage of outliers (n = 38, 24.4% vs n = 9, 5.8%) was statistically significant (p < 0.001) in favor of RATKA. The achieved varus-valgus of the femoral component (varus 1.3° ± 1.7° vs valgus - 0.1° ± 1.9°, p < 0.05) with statistically significant less outliers (0% vs 88.5%, p < 0.01), the achieved HKA-axis (varus 0.4° ± 2.1° vs valgus - 1.2° ± 2.1°, p < 0.05) and the posterior tibial slope (1.4° ± 1.1° vs 3.2° ± 1.8°, p < 0.05) were more accurate with RATKA. The most common postoperative CPAK categories were type II (50% CTKA vs 61.5% RATKA), type I (3.8% CTKA vs 23.1% RATKA) and type V (26.9% CTKA vs 15.4% RATKA). CPAK classification III was only found in CTKA (19.2%). Type VI, VII, VIII, and IX were rare in both populations. CONCLUSIONS: The present trial demonstrates that an imageless handheld RATKA system can be used to accurately perioperatively plan the desired individual component implant positions with less alignment outliers whilst aiming for a constitutional alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Postoperative full leg radiographs exhibit less residual coronal varus deformity compared to intraoperative measurements in robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty with the MAKO™ system.

PURPOSE: Robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty (raTKA), currently a major trend in knee arthroplasty, aims to improve the accuracy of implant positioning and limb alignment. However, it is unclear whether and to what extent manual radiographic and navigation measurements with the MAKO™ system correlate. Nonetheless, a high agreement would be crucial to reliably achieve the desired limb alignment. METHODS: Thirty-six consecutive patients with osteoarthritis and a slight-to-moderate varus deformity undergoing raTKA were prospectively included in this study. Prior to surgery and at follow-up, a full leg radiograph (FLR) under weight-bearing conditions was performed. In addition, a computed tomography (CT) scan was conducted for preoperative planning. The hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), mechanical lateral distal femur angle (mLDFA), mechanical medial proximal tibial angle (mMPTA) and joint line convergence angle (JLCA) were measured in the preoperative and follow-up FLR as well as in the CT scout (without weight-bearing) by three independent raters. Furthermore, the HKA was intraoperatively assessed with the MAKO™ system before and after raTKA. RESULTS: Significantly higher HKA values were identified for intraoperative deformity assessment using the MAKO system compared to the preoperative FLR and CT scouts (p = 0.006; p = 0.05). Intraoperative assessment of the HKA with final implants showed a mean residual varus deformity of 3.2° ± 1.9°, whereas a significantly lower residual varus deformity of 1.4° ± 1.9° was identified in the postoperative FLR (p < 0.001). The mMPTA was significantly higher in the preoperative FLR than in the CT scouts (p < 0.001). Intraoperatively, the mMPTA was adjusted to a mean of 87.5° ± 0.9° with final implants, while significantly higher values were measured in postoperative FLRs (p < 0.001). Concerning the mLDFA, no significant differences could be identified. CONCLUSION: The clinical importance of this study lies in the finding that there is a difference between residual varus deformity measured intraoperatively with the MAKO™ system and those measured in postoperative FLRs. This has implications for preoperative planning as well as intraoperative fine-tuning of the implant position during raTKA to avoid overcorrection of knees with slight-to-moderate varus osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Comparison of Femoral Component Rotation between Robotic-Assisted vs. Soft-Tissue Tensor Total Knee Arthroplasty with Anatomic Implants.

Background and Objectives: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the most effective treatment method for end-stage osteoarthritis. One of the most important aspects of this surgery is adequate implant positioning, as it guarantees the desired outcome of restoring limb biomechanics. Surgical technique is being continuously improved along with hardware development. There are two novel devices designed to help establish proper femoral component rotation: soft-tissue tensor and robotic-assisted TKA (RATKA). This study compared the femoral component rotation achieved with the use of three methods: RATKA, soft tissue tensioner and the conventional measured-resection technique, all of them utilizing anatomical design prosthesis components. Materials and Methods: A total of 139 patients diagnosed with end-stage osteoarthritis underwent total knee arthroplasty between December 2020 and June 2021. After the surgery, they were divided into three groups depending on procedure technique and implant type: Persona (Zimmer Biomet) + Fuzion Balancer, RATKA + Journey II BCS or conventional TKA + Persona/Journey. Postoperatively, a computed tomography examination was performed in order to measure femoral component rotation. All three groups were compared independently during statistical analysis. Fisher's exact, Kruskal-Wallis and Dwass-Steel-Crichtlow-Fligner tests were used for particular calculations. Results: Statistically significant differences in femoral component rotation between groups were noticed. However, in terms of values other than 0° in external rotation, no significant variance was revealed. Conclusions: Additional total knee arthroplasty instruments seem to improve the outcomes of the surgery, providing better component positioning than in the conventional measured-resection technique based only on bone landmarks.

Does Robotic Assisted Technique Improve Patient Utility in Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Comparative Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Even if robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) is a widely used technique, there is still a gap of knowledge about whether this technology is effective in improving the patient utility. This measure is of paramount importance for conducting cost effectiveness analysis. The aim of this study was to compare the utility measure derived from self-reported outcomes questionnaires in patients who underwent RATKA compared to patients who underwent the manual surgery. METHODS: We compared 72 patients operated with a robotic technique with 70 operated with traditional technique. The utility data were collected with the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis index) self-administrated questionnaire that investigates pain, stiffness and functionality of the patients, an then mapped to a utility value through a validated transforming function. We performed three surveys: the first one before the intervention (t0), the second one 1 year after the surgery (t1) and the third one at the 2 year follow up (t2). RESULTS: we observed higher utility values in both groups. In detail, the mean utility score in the RATKA group increased from 0.37 to 0.71 (t1) and 0.78 (t2), while in the conventional group it increased from 0.41 to 0.78 (t1) and 0.78 (t2). The fixed effect coefficients of t1 and t2 were found to be 0.37 and 0.363 (p < 0.001 for both). The coefficient of the robotic technique, along with its interaction with the t1 and t2 time effect was non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: Even if at t1 the utility of patient who underwent RATKA were lower, at longer follow up (t2) we found no significant difference compared to traditional technique, leaving the superiority of robotic assisted technique yet to be proved. Our results may be useful for calculating the gained or lost Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs), so that the health care system (or an insurance company) could make an appropriate decision whether to fund the robotic approach or not, after a careful assessment of the incremental costs incurred.

Surgeon-Applied Stress and a Ligament Tensor Instrument Provide a Similar Assessment of Preresection Flexion Laxity During Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Background: Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) allows surgeons to perform intraoperative soft tissue laxity assessments prior to bone resections and is used to alter resections to achieve gap balance. This study compared 2 techniques for flexion gap laxity assessment during RA-TKA. Methods: A prospective study of 50 primary RA-TKAs performed by a single surgeon was conducted between February and October 2023. Following full exposure, anterior tibial dislocation, and osteophyte removal, maximal medial and lateral compartment flexion laxity was quantified to the nearest 0.5 mm by the robotic system using a dynamic, surgeon-applied stress (SURGEON). This data was used to plan a balanced flexion gap by adjusting the femoral component size, rotation, and anterior-posterior translation. Flexion laxity was quantified again after distal femoral and proximal tibial resections using a ligament tensor instrument (TENSOR). These new data were used to plan for the same desired flexion gap using the same variables. Paired-samples t-tests and a simple linear regression were used for analysis. Results: Both methods produced near-identical recommendations for femoral component sizing (mean deviation 0.06 sizes, range -1 to +1 size; P = .569), rotation (deviation mean 1.0°, range -3.0° to +3.0°; P = .741), and anterior-posterior translation (deviation mean 0.13 mm, range -0.5 to +0.5 mm, P = .785). SURGEON femoral component rotation predicted TENSOR rotation (R2 = 0.157; 95% confidence interval = 0.124, 0.633; P = .004). Conclusions: Assessing flexion laxity with a surgeon-applied stress vs a ligament tensor produced near-identical laxity data in RA-TKA, suggesting surgeons may comfortably choose either technique as a reliable method. Level of Evidence: Level III.

Robotic assistance improves success of cementless component fixation in one total knee arthroplasty system.

INTRODUCTION: New cementless implant designs in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have begun to shift the longstanding practice of cemented fixation. With aseptic loosening a leading cause for revision of cementless implants, initial osteointegration is critical for component survivorship. Robotic-assisted TKA (RA-TKA) has shown promising results in recent literature at improving component accuracy. The current study aims to evaluate if robotic assistance affects the success of cementless fixation in primary TKA. METHODS: 445 cementless primary TKA components from one manufacturer implanted by five surgeons between June 2018 and October 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Those with minimum one-year follow-up were analyzed. Femoral and tibial components were reviewed separately and grouped based on whether manual or RA-TKA from the same manufacturer was performed. Fisher's exact test was used to analyze if aseptic loosening rates were different between the two techniques. RESULTS: 373 (82%) cementless components from a single knee system were included. 146 femoral and 103 tibial components were implanted using RA-TKA, while 63 femoral and 61 tibial components were implanted manually. At a mean follow-up of 18 months (range, 12 to 51 months), successful fixation was achieved in 96.2% of all components. No femoral components from either group were revised due to aseptic loosening. Four manually implanted vs. no robotically assisted tibial components were revised due to aseptic loosening (6.6% vs 0.0%; P = 0.038). CONCLUSION: The performance of modern cementless femoral components was excellent with or without robotic assistance, however RA-TKA improved the survivorship of the same system's cementless tibial component. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

[Translated article] Current situation of robotics in knee prosthetic surgery: A technology that has come to stay?

Robotic surgery is a surgical technique that is on the rise. The goal of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) is to provide the surgeon with a tool to accurately execute bone cuts according to previous surgical planning to restore knee kinematics and balance of soft tissue, being able to precisely apply the type of alignment that we choose. In addition, RA-TKA is a very useful tool for training. Within the limitations, there is the learning curve, the need for specific equipment, the high cost of the devices, the increase in radiation in some systems and that each robot is linked to a specific type of implant. Current studies show, with RA-TKA, variations in the alignment of the mechanical axis are reduced, postoperative pain is improved and earlier discharge is facilitated. On the other hand, there are no differences in terms of range of motion, alignment, gap balance, complications, surgical time or functional results.

Current situation of robotics in knee prosthetic surgery, a technology that has come to stay? / Situación actual de la robótica en cirugía protésica de rodilla, ¿una tecnología que ha venido para quedarse?

Robotic surgery is a surgical technique that is on the rise. The goal of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) is to provide the surgeon with a tool to accurately execute bone cuts according to previous surgical planning to restore knee kinematics and balance of soft tissue, being able to precisely apply the type of alignment that we choose. In addition, RA-TKA is a very useful tool for training. Within the limitations, there is the learning curve, the need for specific equipment, the high cost of the devices, the increase in radiation in some systems and that each robot is linked to a specific type of implant. Current studies show, with RA-TKA, variations in the alignment of the mechanical axis are reduced, postoperative pain is improved and earlier discharge is facilitated. On the other hand, there are no differences in terms of range of motion, alignment, gap balance, complications, surgical time or functional results.

Comparison of patient reported outcomes after robotic versus manual total knee arthroplasty in the same patient undergoing staged bilateral knee arthroplasty.

Background: Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) has been proven to improve accuracy of component positioning and reducing alignment target outliers. However, the clinical benefit of robotics is often debated. Recent studies have shown reduced pain and faster recovery in the immediate post-operative period and may be associated with improved PROMs and satisfaction. The aim of this study was to assess PROMs and satisfaction in a unique patient population undergoing bilateral staged TKA to compare manual (MTKA) and RATKA in the same patient. Methods: 55 patients underwent bilateral staged TKA, performed by a single surgeon at a single institute. Patients who underwent TKA for the first knee with manual technique and RATKA for the second side, were eligible for inclusion in the study. Primary outcome assessed was the Oxford Knee Score and secondary outcomes included the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), patient satisfaction, mean duration for independent ambulation after TKA, and patient perspectives on recovery evaluated with a questionnaire. Results: Both RATKA and MTKA were associated with comparable PROMs. Though RATKA was associated with improved joint perception (Mean FJS after MTKA surgery was 70.3 (SD = 10.66) and significantly lower than the mean FJS after RATKA (73, SD = 10.95, p-value < 0.01), but the difference was not clinically relevant. A higher proportion of patients were more likely to be very satisfied or satisfied after RATKA. A significant proportion of patients felt the knee operated with RATKA was less painful and felt more natural compared to MTKA at final follow-up (p < 0.01). Majority of patients would undergo RATKA again and recommend robotic-TKA to others. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted surgery was associated with improved patient satisfaction, faster independent ambulation compared to manual techniques. PROMs however, were comparable without clinically significant differences. Patients preferred robotic-assisted surgery, with a significantly higher proportion perceiving knee operated by RATKA felt more natural.

A clinical review of robotic navigation in total knee arthroplasty: historical systems to modern design.

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has shown improved reproducibility and precision in mechanical alignment restoration, with improvement in early functional outcomes and 90-day episode of care cost savings compared to conventional TKA in some studies. However, its value is still to be determined.Current studies of RA-TKA systems are limited by short-term follow-up and significant heterogeneity of the available systems.In today's paradigm shift towards an increased emphasis on quality of care while curtailing costs, providing value-based care is the primary goal for healthcare systems and clinicians. As robotic technology continues to develop, longer-term studies evaluating implant survivorship and complications will determine whether the initial capital is offset by improved outcomes.Future studies will have to determine the value of RA-TKA based on longer-term survivorships, patient-reported outcome measures, functional outcomes, and patient satisfaction measures. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:252-269. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200071.