Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computer-Assisted and Robotic Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

  • 48 Accesses

Abstract

Computer-assisted and robotic unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKA) have improved positioning and reproducibility and are a rare surgical procedure in France. Navigation can be performed by navigating tibial resection alone or by navigating tibial and femoral resection. Navigation is used to place a UKA with navigation on the tibial plateau and femoral condyle. Preoperative preparation requires radiographic measurement of two elements, and a semicircular frame is fixed under navigation control to the femoral reference screw. The Navio® system from Smith & Nephew and the MAKO® system from Stryker can be used to implant a medial UKA with isolated navigation on the tibial plateau. The NAVIO® system does not require preoperative imaging and is based on kinematic preoperative image acquisitions and acquisition of points of interest. Dynamic acquisition of the hip, ankle and knee axis of flexion is essential for effective dynamic planning. Points of interest are acquired on the femur and tibia, and the desired position is determined in three spatial planes. The femoral component should be as close as possible to the intercondylar notch to improve contact points between the femoral and tibial implants. The tibial and femoral components should be positioned in varus/valgus, tibial slope, rotation and mediolateral positioning. The MAKO® system (Stryker) consists of four components: an infrared camera, a screen for the surgeon, a control console for the engineer, and a robotic arm. It is used to plan the positioning of the implants and assess mobility of the knee. Positioning of femoral and tibial sensors percutaneously, acquisition of points of interest, ligament balance, preoperative planning, bone cuts, tests, and results are similar to the NAVIO® system. Robotic UKA has a significant advantage in terms of aberrant values, restitution of the joint space, and faster procedure times due to preoperative planning and the robotic arm. It also reduces the risk of complications in the tibial implant.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Marmor L. The Marmor knee replacement. Orthop Clin North Am. 1982;13(1):55–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cartier P, Cheaib S. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty: 2–10 years of follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplast. 1987;2(2):157–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ayach A, Plaweski S, Saragaglia D. Computer-assisted uni knee arthroplasty for genu varum deformity. Results of axial correction in a case-control study of 40 cases. In: 9th annual meeting of CAOS-International proceedings; 2009. p. 4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cossey AJ, Spriggins AJ. The use of computer-assisted surgical navigation to prevent malalignment in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2005;20(1):29–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jenny J-Y, Boeri C. Unicompartmental knee prosthesis implantation with a non-image-based navigation system: rationale, technique, case-control comparative study with a conventional instrumented implantation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2003;11(1):40–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jung KA, Kim SJ, Lee SC, Hwang SH, Ahn NK. Accuracy of implantation during computer-assisted minimally invasive Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison with a conventional instrumented technique. Knee. 2010;17(6):387–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Haute Autorité de Santé. Rapport d’évaluation - Implants articulaires du genou. 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lustig S, Lording T, Frank F, Debette C, Servien E, Neyret P. Progression of medial osteoarthritis and long term results of lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty: 10 to 18 year follow-up of 54 consecutive implants. Knee. 2014;21(Suppl 1):S26–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nunley RM, Nam D, Johnson SR, Barnes CL. Extreme variability in posterior slope of the proximal tibia: measurements on 2395 CT scans of patients undergoing UKA? J Arthroplast. 2014;29(8):1677–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kaya Bicer E, Servien E, Lustig S, Demey G, Ait Si Selmi T, Neyret P. Sagittal flexion angle of the femoral component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: is it same for both medial and lateral UKAs? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010;18(7):928–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Servien E, Fary C, Lustig S, Demey G, Saffarini M, Chomel S, et al. Tibial component rotation assessment using CT scan in medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011;97(3):272–5; https://www.em-consulte.com/en/article/288184.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Servien E, Saffarini M, Lustig S, Chomel S, Neyret P. Lateral versus medial tibial plateau: morphometric analysis and adaptability with current tibial component design. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008;16(12):1141–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Weber P, Schröder C, Laubender RP, Baur-Melnyk A, von Schulze PC, Jansson V, et al. Joint line reconstruction in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: development and validation of a measurement method. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(11):2468–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jenny J-Y, Saragaglia D. Navigation informatisée des prothèses unicompartimentales du genou. In: Prothèses partielles de genou. ELSEVIER MASSON. (Cahiers d’enseignement de la SOFCOT); 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jenny J-Y. Navigated unicompartmental knee replacement. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2008;16(2):103–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Saragaglia D, Picard F, Refaie R. Navigation of the tibial plateau alone appears to be sufficient in computer-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2012;36(12):2479–83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Jenny J-Y, Saussac F, Louis P. Navigated, minimal invasive, mobile bearing unicompartmental knee prosthesis. A 2-year follow-up study. Orthopaedic Proc. 2012;94-B(SUPP_XXXVII):271.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Batailler C, White N, Ranaldi FM, Neyret P, Servien E, Lustig S. Improved implant position and lower revision rate with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;27:1232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5081-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Herry Y, Batailler C, Lording T, Servien E, Neyret P, Lustig S. Improved joint-line restitution in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using a robotic-assisted surgical technique. Int Orthop. 2017;41(11):2265–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Leelasestaporn C, Tarnpichprasert T, Arirachakaran A, Kongtharvonskul J. Comparison of 1-year outcomes between MAKO versus NAVIO robot-assisted medial UKA: nonrandomized, prospective, comparative study. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2020;32(1):13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Porcelli P, Marmotti A, Bellato E, Colombero D, Ferrero G, Agati G, et al. Comparing different approaches in robotic-assisted surgery for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: outcomes at a short-term follow-up of MAKO versus NAVIO system. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2020;34(4 Suppl. 3):393–404. Congress of the Italian Orthopaedic Research Society

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Batailler C, Bordes M, Lording T, Nigues A, Servien E, Calliess T, et al. Improved sizing with image-based robotic-assisted system compared to image-free and conventional techniques in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2021;103-B(4):610–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Service de chirurgie orthopédique, Hôpital de la Croix Rousse, Hospices civils de Lyon, Lyon, France

    Constant Foissey, Cécile Batailler, Elvire Servien & Sébastien Lustig

Authors
  1. Constant Foissey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cécile Batailler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elvire Servien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sébastien Lustig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique, Clinique Saint George, Nice, France

    Arnaud Clavé

  2. Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique, CHU Cavale Blanche, Brest, France

    Frédéric Dubrana

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Foissey, C., Batailler, C., Servien, E., Lustig, S. (2024). Computer-Assisted and Robotic Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties. In: Clavé, A., Dubrana, F. (eds) Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48332-5_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48332-5_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-48331-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-48332-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation