RESUMEN
Background: The primary objective of this study was to determine the accuracy and precision of component positioning of the ROSA Robotic System for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis systematic review was conducted using 4 electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library) to identify all clinical and radiological studies reporting information about the use and results of the ROSA system. The criteria for inclusion were published research articles evaluating the accuracy of component positioning, learning curve, component alignment, complications, and functional outcomes in adults who underwent robotic-assisted TKA. The National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool was used to evaluate the quality of all the included studies. Results: A total of 26 studies were assessed for eligibility, and 17 met the inclusion criteria. Nine studies reported on the accuracy and precision of component positioning. The ROSA platform for TKA had a cutting error of less than 0.6° for all coronal and sagittal parameters. Pooled analysis demonstrated accuracy within 0.61-1.87° and precision within 0.97-1.34° when the final intraoperative plan was compared to postoperative radiographs with fewer outliers. Four studies reported improved functional scores with ROSA-assisted TKA than conventional TKA within 1 year of surgery. There was no difference in overall complication rates when compared to conventional TKA. Conclusions: The ROSA system is both highly accurate and precise, with fewer outliers when analyzed at various time points, including postoperative standing radiographs. Future studies with robust methodology and longer follow-up are required to demonstrate whether these findings have any clinical benefits in the long term.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been shown to improve the accuracy and precision of bony resections and implant position. However, the in vivo accuracy of the full surgical workflow has not been widely reported. The primary objective of this study is to determine the accuracy and precision of a robotic-arm-assisted system throughout the intraoperative workflow. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent primary TKA with various workflows and alignment targets by three arthroplasty-trained surgeons with previous experience using the ROSA® Knee System (Zimmer Biomet) over a 3-month follow-up period. Accuracy and precision were determined by measuring the difference between various workflow time points, including the final preoperative plan (PP), robot-validated (RV) resection angle and postoperative radiographs (PR). The absolute mean difference between the measurements determined accuracy, and the standard deviation represented precision. The lateral distal femoral angle, medial proximal tibial angle, femoral flexion angle and tibial slope were measured on postoperative coronal long-leg radiographs and true short-leg lateral radiographs. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients were included in the final analyses. The accuracy for the coronal femoral angle was 1.62 ± 1.11°, 0.75 ± 0.79° and 1.96 ± 1.29° for the differences between PP and PR, PP and RV and RV and PR. The tibial coronal accuracy was 1.44 ± 1.03°, 0.81 ± 0.67° and 1.57 ± 1.14° for PP/PR, PP/RV and RV/PR, respectively. Femoral flexion accuracy was 1.39 ± 1.05°, 0.83 ± 0.59° and 1.81 ± 1.21° for PP/PR, PP/RV and RV/PR, respectively. Tibial slope accuracy was 0.99 ± 0.72°, 1.19 ± 0.87° and 1.63 ± 1.11°, respectively. The proportion of patients within 3° was 93.2%, 95.3%, 97.3% and 94.6% for the distal femur, proximal tibia, femoral flexion and tibial slope angles when the final intraoperative plan was compared to PRs. No patients had a postoperative complication at the final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The ROSA Knee System has acceptable accuracy and precision of coronal and sagittal plane resections with few outliers at various steps throughout the platform's entire workflow in vivo. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.