Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mako versus ROSA: comparing surgical accuracy in robotic total knee arthroplasty

  • Research
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is increasing adoption of robotic surgical technology in Total Knee Arthroplasty. The ROSA® knee system can be used in either image-based mode (using pre-operative calibrated radiographs) or imageless modes (using intra-operative bony registration). The Mako knee system is an image-based system (using a pre-operative CT scan). This study aimed to compare surgical accuracy between the ROSA and Mako systems with specific reference to joint line height, patella height, posterior condylar offset and tibial slope. This was a retrospective review of a prospectively collected data of the initial 50 consecutive ROSA TKAs and the initial 50 consecutive Mako TKAs performed by two high-volume surgeons. To determine the accuracy of component positioning, the immediate post-operative radiograph was reviewed and compared with the immediate pre-operative radiograph with regards to joint line height (JLH), patella height (PH), tibial slope (TS) and posterior condylar offset (PCO). Mean difference between pre- and post-operative radiographs using the ROSA knee system of joint line height was 0.47 mm (SD 0.95) posterior condylar offset 0.16 mm (SD 0.76), tibial slope 0.9 degrees (SD 1.6) and patella height 0.01 (SD 0.05). Mean difference using the MAKO knee system of joint line height was 0.26 (SD 1.08), posterior condylar offset −0.26 mm (SD 0.78), tibial slope 1.8 degrees and patella height 0.03. No significant difference was demonstrated between the accuracy of component positioning of the ROSA or MAKO knee systems. Our study is the first study to compare the accuracy of the ROSA and MAKO knee systems in total knee arthroplasty. Both systems are highly accurate in restoring native posterior condylar offset, joint line height, tibial slope and patella height in TKA with no significant difference demonstrated between the two groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

References

  1. Yapp LZ, Scott CEH, MacDonald DJ, Howie CR, Simpson AHRW, Clement ND (2023) Primary knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis restores patients’ health-related quality of life to normal population levels. Bone Joint J 105-B(4):365–372. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.105B4.BJJ-2022-0659.R1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. No authors listed: National joint registry: 19th Annual report, 2022. https://reports.njrcentre.org.uk/Portals/0/PDFdownloads/NJR%2016th%20Annual%20Report%202019.pdf

  3. Culliford D, Maskell J, Judge A, Cooper C, Prieto-Alhambra D, Arden NK (2015) Future projections of total hip and knee arthroplasty in the UK: results from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Osteoarthr Cartil 23(4):594–600

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Muertizha M, Cai X, Ji B, Aimaiti A, Cao L (2022) Factors contributing to 1-year dissatisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: a nomogram prediction model. J Orthop Surg Res 17(1):367

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Nakano N, Shoman H, Olavarria F et al (2020) Why are patients dissatisfied following a total knee replacement? A systematic review. Int Orthop (SICOT) 44:1971–2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04607-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hadi M, Barlow T, Ahmed I et al (2015) Does malalignment affect revision rate in total knee replacements: a systematic review of the literature. Springerplus 4:835. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1604-4

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Brinkman J, Christopher Z, Moore M, Pollock J, Haglin JM, Bingham J (2022) Patient interest in robotic total joint arthroplasty is exponential: a 10-year Google trends analysis. Arthroplasty Today 15:13–18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Sires JD, Craik JD, Wilson CJ (2021) Accuracy of bone resection in MAKO total knee robotic-assisted surgery. J Knee Surg 34(07):745–748

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kayani B, Konan S, Pietrzak JRT, Haddad FS (2018) Iatrogenic Bone and Soft Tissue Trauma in Robotic-Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Compared with Conventional Jig-Based Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Cohort Study and Validation of a New Classification System. J Arthroplast 33:2496–2501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Parratte S, Price AJ, Jeys LM, Jackson WF, Clarke HD (2019) Accuracy of a new robotically assisted technique for total knee arthroplasty: a cadaveric study. J Arthroplasty 34:2799–2803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shin C, Crovetti C, Huo E, Lionberger D (2022) Unsatisfactory accuracy of recent robotic assisting system ROSA for total knee arthroplasty. J Exp Orthop 9(1):82

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Sarmah SS, Patel S, Hossain FS, Haddad FS (2012) The radiological assessment of total and unicompartmental knee replacements. J Bone Jt Surg Ser B 94B(10):1321–1329. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B10.29411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bellemans J, Vandenneucker OH, Surgeon O, Moemans A, Victor J, Banks S et al (2002) Fluoroscopic analysis of the kinematics of deep flexion in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jont Surg 84-B(1):50–53. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.84B1.0840050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Figgie HE, Goldberg VM, Heiple KG, Moller HS, Gordon NH (1986) The influence of tibial-patellofemoral location on function of the knee in patients with the posterior stabilized condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Jt Surg––Ser A 68:1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Clavé A, Le Henaff G, Roger T, Maisongrosse P, Mabit C, Dubrana F (2016) Joint line level in revision total knee replacement: assessment and functional results with an average of seven years follow-up. Int Orthop 40:1655–1662

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. van Lieshout WA, Valkering KP, Koenraadt KL, van Etten-Jamaludin FS, Kerkhoffs GM, van Geenen RC (2019) The negative effect of joint line elevation after total knee arthroplasty on outcome. Knee Surg, Sports Traumatol, Arthroscopy 1(27):1477–1486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yang J-H, Seo J-G, Moon Y-W, Kim M-H (2009) Joint line changes after navigation-assisted mobile-bearing TKA. Orthopedics 32:35–39. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20090915-57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Goutham GD, Jain VK, Sinha S, Arya RK (2020) Effect of posterior condylar offset in post operative range of motion in cruciate retaining and sacrificing TKR: A comparative analysis. J Orthop 1(20):342–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Meneghini RM, Ritter MA, Pierson JL, Meding JB, Berend ME, Faris PM (2006) The effect of the Insall-Salvati ratio on outcome after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 21(6 Suppl 2):116–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Adıyeke L, Kafadar AB, Erdoğan Ö, Gündüz ÇD (2022) The effect of tibial slope angle on clinical and functional results after mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop, Trauma Rehabilit. https://doi.org/10.1177/22104917221075828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kayani B, Haddad FS (2019) Robotic total knee arthroplasty: clinical outcomes and directions for future research. Bone Joint Res 8(10):438–442

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, Bristol Rd S, The Woodlands, Northfield, Birmingham, B31 2AP, UK

    Harshadkumar D. Rajgor, Alistair Mayne, Joseph Pagkalos, Yuvraj Agrawal, Edward T. Davis & Akash D. Sharma

  2. University of Birmingham Medical School, Birmingham, UK

    Chathura Munasinghe & Edward T. Davis

Authors
  1. Harshadkumar D. Rajgor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alistair Mayne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chathura Munasinghe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joseph Pagkalos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yuvraj Agrawal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Edward T. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Akash D. Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

HDR: data collection, analysis and writing of the manuscript. AM: data collection, analysis and writing of the manuscript. CM: data collection, analysis and writing of the manuscript. YA: writing of the manuscript. IP: writing of the manuscript. ETD: writing of the manuscript. ADS: conceptualisation of project, data collection, analysis and writing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harshadkumar D. Rajgor.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Mr Davis has received study funding from Stryker and Smith and Nephew. Mr Sharma has received payment for lectures from Zimmer Biomet and Smith and Nephew. These were not related to this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional approval from The Royal Orthopaedic Hospital was received to carry out the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rajgor, H.D., Mayne, A., Munasinghe, C. et al. Mako versus ROSA: comparing surgical accuracy in robotic total knee arthroplasty. J Robotic Surg 18, 33 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01786-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01786-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation