ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to describe a planning method for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) implantation using preoperative stress radiographs to measure the thickness of tibial and femoral bone resections and to validate this method with data from an image-based robotic surgery system. Having such method for preoperative planning would be of interest for surgeons performing UKA in order to anticipate optimal bone resection on both tibia and femoral sides. METHODS: A new planning method for medial UKA based on valgus stress knee radiographs validated it with an image-based robotic surgery system (Restoris MCK, MAKO®, Stryker Corporation) was proposed. This retrospective study involved radiographic measurements of 76 patients who underwent image-based robotic medial UKA between April 2022 and February 2023. Preoperative anteroposterior stress radiographs of the knee were used to simulate UKA implantation. The UKA technique was based on Cartier's angle and aimed at restoring the joint line. The total dimension measured was 14 mm (8 mm for minimal tibial component and polyethylene insert + 4 mm for femoral component + 2 mm for safety laxity). Bone resections were measured in the preoperative valgus stress radiographs and then against the intraoperative bone resection data provided by the robotic system. Inter- and intra-observer reliability was assessed using 25 measurements. RESULTS: The mean planned tibial resection measured in the radiographs was 4.3 ± 0.4 [2.9-5.8], while the mean robotic resection was 4.2 ± 0.5 [2.7-5.8] (mean difference = 0.15 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-0.27 to 0.57]). There was a strong correlation between these two values (Pearson's rank R = 0.79, p < 0.001). Intra- and inter-observer reliability were also very strong (Pearson's rank R = 0.91, p < 0.001, and Pearson's rank R = 0.82, p < 0.001, respectively). The mean planned femoral bone resection measured in the radiographs was 2.7 ± 0.7 mm [1-4.5], while the mean robotic resection was 2.5 ± 0.9 [1-5] (mean difference = 0.21 mm, 95% CI [-0.66 to 1.08]). There was a strong correlation between these two values (Pearson's rank R = 0.82, p < 0.001). Intra- and inter-observer reliability were also strong (Pearson's rank R = 0.88, p < 0.001, and Pearson's rank R = 0.84, p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study describes and validates with robotic information a simple and reproducible preoperative planning method to determine femoral and tibial bone resection for medial UKA implantation using antero-posterior valgus stress knee radiographs, leaving a medial safety laxity of 2 mm. It represents a very valuable contribution to the understanding of UKA principles, which can serve to extend its indications and increase reproducibility of the surgical technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Retrospective cohort study.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare the degree of accuracy in implant positioning and limb alignment offered by two robot-assisted (RA) systems: an image-based robot-assisted (IBRA) versus an imageless robot-assisted (ILRA) system for the treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). METHODS: This retrospective radiographic study included medial UKAs performed between 2011 and 2023. Radiographic measurements taken preoperatively and at 1-year postoperative control visit focusing on hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), posterior tibial slope (PTS), tibial component coronal alignment relative to Cartier's angle and restoration of proper joint line (JL) height were analyzed. Outliers for postoperative measurements were defined as follows: HKA <175° or >180°, PTS <2° or >8°, >3° or <-3° alterations in Cartier's angle and ±2 mm changes in the height of the joint line. RESULTS: The final sample consisted of 292 medial UKAs: 95 (32.5%) with an IBRA system and 197 (67.5%) with an ILRA system. Implant positioning and limb alignment were more accurate in the group of patients treated with IBRA, HKA (77.9% vs. 67.5%, p = 0.07), PTS (93.7% vs. 82.7%, p = 0.01), restoration of tibial varus relative to Cartier's angle (87.4% vs. 65%, p < 0.001) and restoration of JL height (81.1% vs. 69.5%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Medial UKA surgery using an IBRA system was associated with a higher degree of accuracy in implant positioning and postoperative limb alignment as compared to an ILRA system. This is a valuable contribution to help communicate the advantages of using this surgical technique and improve its reproducibility. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective cohort study.