Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic-arm assisted versus conventional technique for total knee arthroplasty: early results of a prospective single centre study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare the early functional outcomes between robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) and conventional manual total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods

This prospective cohort study included 52 patients (26 RATKA and 26 TKA). All procedures were performed by a single experienced surgeon using identical approach and implant designs. Post-operative evaluation consisted of the risks of inflammatory and blood loss, the accuracy of mechanical alignment, post-operative pain, peri-operative and post-operative functional outcomes, and complications for 30 days after index surgery.

Results

There was no statistical difference in baseline characteristics of patients between two groups (p > 0.05). There was a trend that the operative time of RATKA was prolonged compared with manual TKA (p < 0.0001). However, the risks of infection and blood loss did not increase accordingly (p > 0.05). No statistical difference was found in the correction of mechanical alignment between two groups (p > 0.05). The RATKA was associated with reduced pain post-operatively in day 1 (p < 0.05). Afterwards, there was no systematic difference in VAS score from day two to three post-operatively (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in functional recovery (p > 0.05). No complication occurred in both groups.

Conclusion

Although the operative time was prolonged in RATKA, it did not increase the risks of infection and blood loss. There was no significant difference in radiological or functional outcomes between RATKA and conventional manual TKA. RATKA might be related to reduced pain after surgery.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The final dataset will be available from the corresponding author.

References

  1. Haddad F S (2017) What is the optimal level of expectation? Bone Joint J 99-B(9): 1121–1122. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B9.BJJ-2017-0938.

  2. Vertullo CJ, Graves SE, Cuthbert AR et al (2019) The effect of surgeon preference for selective patellar resurfacing on revision risk in total knee replacement: an instrumental variable analysis of 136,116 procedures from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Am 101(14):1261–1270. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.01350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mahoney O, Kinsey T, Sodhi N et al (2020) Improved component placement accuracy with robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1715571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zambianchi F, Bazzan G, Marcovigi A et al (2021) Joint line is restored in robotic-arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty performed with a tibia-based functional alignment. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-04039-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Thilak J, Babu BC, Thadi M et al (2021) Accuracy in the execution of pre-operative plan for limb alignment and implant positioning in robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty and manual total knee arthroplasty: a prospective observational study. Indian J Orthop 55(4):953–960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-020-00324-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Sires JD, Craik JD, Wilson CJ (2021) Accuracy of bone resection in MAKO total knee robotic-assisted surgery. J Knee Surg 34(7):745–748. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1700570

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kayani B, Tahmassebi J, Ayuob A, et al. (2021) A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing the systemic inflammatory response in conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty versus robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 103-B(1): 113–122 https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.103B1.BJJ-2020-0602.R2

  8. Kayani B, Konan S, Huq SS et al (2019) Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty has a learning curve of seven cases for integration into the surgical workflow but no learning curve effect for accuracy of implant positioning. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(4):1132–1141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5138-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. van der List JP, Chawla H, Joskowicz L et al (2016) Current state of computer navigation and robotics in unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(11):3482–3495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4305-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Devers BN, Conditt MA, Jamieson ML et al (2011) Does greater knee flexion increase patient function and satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty 26(2):178–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2010.02.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Urish KL, Conditt M, Roche M et al (2016) Robotic total knee arthroplasty: surgical assistant for a customized normal kinematic knee. Orthopedics 39(5):e822-827. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20160623-13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim YH, Yoon SH, Park JW (2020) Does robotic-assisted TKA result in better outcome scores or long-term survivorship than conventional TKA? A randomized, controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 478(2):266–275. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000916

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cip J, Obwegeser F, Benesch T et al (2018) Twelve-year follow-up of navigated computer-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized comparative trial. J Arthroplasty 33(5):1404–1411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.12.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kayani B, Konan S, Tahmassebi J, et al. (2018) Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved early functional recovery and reduced time to hospital discharge compared with conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study. Bone Joint J 100-B(7): 930–937. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.100B7.BJJ-2017-1449.R1

  15. Sodhi N, Khlopas A, Piuzzi NS et al (2018) The learning curve associated with robotic total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 31(1):17–21. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1608809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee DY, Park YJ, Hwang SC et al (2020) No differences in mid- to long-term outcomes of computer-assisted navigation versus conventional total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(10):3183–3192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05808-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Liow MHL, Goh GS, Wong MK et al (2017) Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty may lead to improvement in quality-of-life measures: a 2-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial [J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(9):2942–2951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4076-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Khlopas A, Sodhi N, Hozack WJ et al (2020) Patient-reported functional and satisfaction outcomes after robotic-arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty: early results of a prospective multicenter investigation [J]. J Knee Surg 33(7):685–690. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1684014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kayani B, Konan S, Ayuob A et al (2019) Robotic technology in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review [J]. EFORT Open Rev 4(10):611–617. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.190022

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Bhimani SJ, Bhimani R, Smith A et al (2020) Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrates decreased postoperative pain and opioid usage compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty [J]. Bone & Joint Open 1(2):8–12. https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.12.Bjo-2019-0004.R1

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study is supported by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (81802151) and Shandong Province Nature Science Foundation (Grant number 2018M642616); Qingdao Applied Foundation Research Youth Project (Grant number 19–6-2–55-cg).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Joint Surgery, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong, China

    Chenkai Li, Tao Li, Zian Zhang & Haining Zhang

  2. Department of Anesthesiology, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266000, China

    Hui Huang

  3. Operating Room of Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266000, China

    Chun Rong & Wanping Zhu

Authors
  1. Chenkai Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tao Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zian Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hui Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chun Rong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Wanping Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Haining Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

CKL wrote the paper. CKL and TL performed all the analysis. TL, ZZA, CR, and WPZ collected the data and participated in writing and revising the paper. HNZ designed the whole study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haining Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was approved by our Institutional Ethical Committee according to the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

The participant has consented to the submission of the case report to the journal.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, C., Li, T., Zhang, Z. et al. Robotic-arm assisted versus conventional technique for total knee arthroplasty: early results of a prospective single centre study. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 46, 1331–1338 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-022-05351-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-022-05351-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation