RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Few studies have addressed whether robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) significantly impacts functional outcomes. This study was conducted to determine whether image-free RA-TKA improves function compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty (C-TKA), performed without the utilization of robotics or navigation, using the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) as measures of meaningful clinical improvement. METHODS: A multicenter propensity score-matched retrospective study was conducted of RA-TKA using an image-free robotic system and C-TKA cases at an average follow-up of 14 months (range, 12 months to 20 months). Consecutive patients who underwent primary unilateral TKA and had a preoperative and postoperative Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) were included. The primary outcomes were the MCID and PASS for KOOS-JR. 254 RA-TKA and 762 C-TKA patients were included, with no significant differences in sex, age, body mass index, or comorbidities. RESULTS: Preoperative KOOS-JR scores were similar in the RA-TKA and C-TKA cohorts. Significantly greater improvement in KOOS-JR scores were achieved at 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively with RA-TKA compared to C-TKA. While the mean 1-year postoperative KOOS-JR was significantly higher in the RA-TKA cohort, no significant differences were found in the Delta KOOS-JR scores between the cohorts, when comparing preoperative and 1-year postoperative. No significant differences existed in the rates of MCID or PASS being achieved. CONCLUSION: Image-free RA-TKA reduces pain and improves early functional recovery compared to C-TKA at 4 to 6 weeks, but functional outcomes at 1 year are equivalent based on the MCID and PASS for KOOS-JR.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla , Humanos , Articulación de la Rodilla/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Dolor Postoperatorio/cirugía , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla/cirugíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Alignment errors in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) predispose to premature implant loosening and polyethylene wear. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a novel CT-free robotic surgical assistant improves the accuracy and reproducibility of bone resections in UKA compared to conventional manual instrumentation. METHODS: Sixty matched cadaveric limbs received medial UKA with either the ROSA® Partial Knee System or conventional instrumentation. Fifteen board-certified orthopaedic surgeons with no prior experience with this robotic application performed the procedures with the same implant system. Bone resection angles in the coronal, sagittal and transverse planes were determined using optical navigation while resection depth was obtained using calliper measurements. Group comparison was performed using Student's t test (mean absolute error), F test (variance) and Fisher's exact test (% within a value), with significance at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Compared to conventional instrumentation, the accuracy of bone resections with CT-free robotic assistance was significantly improved for all bone resection parameters (p < 0.05), other than distal femoral resection depth, which did not differ significantly. Moreover, the variance was significantly lower (i.e. fewer chances of outliers) for five of seven parameters in the robotic group (p < 0.05). All values in the robotic group had a higher percentage of cases within 2° and 3° of the intraoperative plan. No re-cuts of the proximal tibia were required in the robotic group compared with 40% of cases in the conventional group. CONCLUSION: The ROSA® Partial Knee System was significantly more accurate, with fewer outliers, compared to conventional instrumentation. The data reported in our current study are comparable to other semiautonomous robotic devices and support the use of this robotic technology for medial UKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cadaveric study, Level V.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla , Prótesis de la Rodilla , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/métodos , Cadáver , Humanos , Articulación de la Rodilla/diagnóstico por imagen , Articulación de la Rodilla/cirugía , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla/cirugía , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodosRESUMEN
Accurate component orientation and restoration of hip biomechanics remains a continuing challenge in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The goal of this study was to analyze the accuracy/reproducibility of a novel CT-free and pin-less robotic-assisted THA (RA-THA) platform compared to manual THA (mTHA). This matched-pair cadaveric study compared this RA-THA system to mTHA (n = 33/arm), both using the assistance of fluoroscopic imaging, in a group of 14 high-volume arthroplasty surgeons. In both groups, surgeons were asked to aim for 40°/15° for cup inclination/version, and 0 mm of leg length discrepancy (LLD). A validated and accurate method using radio-opaque markers measured cup inclination/version and LLD. The accuracy and reproducibility (fewer outliers) of cup inclination was significantly improved in the robotic group (1.8° ± 1.3° vs 6.4° ± 4.9°, respectively, robotic vs manual; p < 0.001), with no significant difference between groups for version. The reproducibility of LLD was significantly improved in the robotic group (p = 0.003). For all parameters studied, the robotic group had an improved accuracy and lower variance (fewer outliers). The percentage of cases within the more restrictive Callanan safe zone was 100% for RA-THA vs 73% for mTHA (p = 0.002). The CT-free RA-THA platform, using only fluoroscopic imaging, demonstrated more accurate acetabular cup positioning, when compared to the mTHA procedures performed by high-volume hip surgeons (naive to this RA-THA platform), with respect to cup inclination and placement within the Lewinnek/Callanan safe zones. Future study must incorporate economic factors, lower volume surgeons, clinical and patient-centric outcomes, and other radiographic parameters in controlled studies in large sample sizes.