Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Robotics

Chapter

Abstract

Orthopedics is a natural and fitting target for the application of recent advances in imaging technology. In an effort to achieve accurate implant placement with minimal invasiveness, many have utilized robotic navigation systems such as the MAKO RIO®.

Keywords

Medial Collateral Ligament Tibial Component Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Tibial Slope Soft Tissue Balance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Collier MB, Eickmann TH, Sukezaki F et al (2006) Patient, implant, and alignment factors associated with revision of medial compartment unicondylar arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 21(6 Suppl 2):108–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coon T, Driscoll M, Conditt MA (2008a) Early clinical success of novel tactile guided UKA technique. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual congress of the ­international society of technology in arthroplasty, International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty, Sacramento, p 141Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coon T, Driscoll M, Conditt MA (2008b) Does less medial tibial plateau resection make a difference in UKA? In: Proceedings of the 21st annual congress of the international society of technology in arthroplasty, International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty, Sacramento, p 274Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coon T, Driscoll M, Conditt MA (2008c) Robotically assisted UKA is more accurate than manually instrumented UKA. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual congress of the international society of technology in arthroplasty, International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty, Sacramento, p 274Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    DeHaven KE (2003) Repicci II unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Arthroscopy 19(Suppl 1):117–119PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:161–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jinnah R, Horowitz S, Lippincott CJ et al (2009) The learning curve of robotic-assisted UKA. Submitted to the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, knee arthroplasty: from early intervention to revision, Institute of Mechanical Engineers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kreuzer S, Driscoll M, Conditt MA (2008) Does conversion of a UKA to a TKA require medial augmentation? In: Proceedings of the 21st annual congress of the international society of technology in arthroplasty, International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty, Sacramento, p 274Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Romanowski MR, Repicci JA (2002) Minimally invasive unicondylar arthroplasty: eight-year follow-up. J Knee Surg 15(1):17–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roche M, Augustin D, Conditt MA (2008) Accuracy of robotically assisted UKA. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual congress of the international society of technology in arthroplasty, International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty, Sacramento, p 175Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sinha RK, Plush R, Weems VJ (2008) Unicompartmental arthroplasty using a tactile guided system. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual congress of the international society of technology in arthroplasty, International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty, Sacramento, p 276Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ESSKA 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryImperial College London, Charing Cross HospitalLondonUK
  2. 2.Orthopaedic DepartmentHospital for Special SurgeryNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations