Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2020; 33(07): 685-690
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1684014
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Patient-Reported Functional and Satisfaction Outcomes after Robotic-Arm-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: Early Results of a Prospective Multicenter Investigation

Anton Khlopas
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
,
Nipun Sodhi
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Lenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, New York
,
William J. Hozack
3   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rothman Institute Orthopaedics, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Antonia F. Chen
4   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Ormonde M. Mahoney
5   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Athens Orthopaedic Clinic, Athens, Georgia
,
Tracy Kinsey
5   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Athens Orthopaedic Clinic, Athens, Georgia
,
Fabio Orozco
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Lenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, New York
,
Michael A. Mont
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Lenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, New York
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

10 December 2018

18 February 2019

Publication Date:
08 April 2019 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to perform a 3-month interim comparative analysis on outcomes between robotic-arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) and manual TKA patients. Specifically, we evaluated (1) patient self-reported symptoms, (2) expectations and satisfaction, and (3) functional activities, based on the 2011 Knee Society Scoring System. Between June 1, 2016, and March 31, 2018, 252 patients (102 manual and 150 robotic) were enrolled into a prospective, nonrandomized, open-label, multicenter comparative cohort study. Functional activity scores, patient-reported symptoms, as well as satisfaction and expectation scores were obtained from the 2011 Knee Society Scoring System preoperatively, at 4 to 6 weeks, and at 3 months postoperatively. Student's t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and chi-square tests with α set at 0.05 were used to compare between-group mean improvements from baseline. At 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively, RATKA patients were found to have significantly larger improvements in walking and standing (1.4 vs. –1.2 points; p = 0.019). RATKA patients were also found to have larger improvements in advanced activities (1.3 vs. 2.3 points), pain with walking (3.3 vs. 3.2 points), satisfaction score (12.4 vs. 12 points), and expectations score (5.1 vs. 4.4 points) when compared with manual TKA patients. At 3 months, RATKA patients were also found to have larger improvements in walking and standing (6.0 vs. 4.8 points), standard activities (11.4 vs. 10.1 points), advanced activities (6.2 vs. 4.6 points), functional activities total score (22.8 vs. 21.2 points), pain with walking (4.3 vs. 4.1 points), total symptoms score (10.5 vs. 10.3 points), satisfaction score (17.0 vs. 15.5 points), expectations score (4.8 vs. 4.0 points) when compared with manual TKA patients. The data indicate RATKA patients to have equal or greater improvements in 9 out of 10 of the Knee Society Scoring System components assessed at 3 months postoperatively, though not all findings were statistically significant. Since this is an early results report, this study will be continued for a longer follow-up, but we are encouraged by these interim results.

Keywords

robotic-arm-assisted - total knee arthroplasty - patient satisfaction - outcomes - surgical technology
 

  • References

  • 1 Zelhart M, Kaiser AM. Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: towards defining criteria to the right choice. Surg Endosc 2018; 32 (01) 24-38
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Matthews CA. New developments in robotics and single-site gynecologic surgery. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2017; 60 (02) 296-311
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Miller BA, Salehi A, Limbrick Jr DDJ, Smyth MD. Applications of a robotic stereotactic arm for pediatric epilepsy and neurooncology surgery. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2017; 20 (04) 364-370
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Khlopas A, Chughtai M, Hampp EL. , et al. Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrated soft tissue protection. Surg Technol Int 2017; 30: 441-446
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Illgen RLN, Bukowski BR, Abiola R. , et al. Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty: outcomes at minimum two-year follow-up. Surg Technol Int 2017; 30: 365-372
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Bukowski BR, Anderson P, Khlopas A, Chughtai M, Mont MA, Illgen II RL. Improved functional outcomes with robotic compared with manual total hip arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int 2016; 29: 303-308
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Elmallah RK, Cherian JJ, Jauregui JJ, Padden DA, Harwin SF, Mont MA. Robotic-arm assisted surgery in total hip arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int 2015; 26: 283-288
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Cashman JP, Carty FL, Synnott K, Kenny PJ. Intramedullary versus extramedullary alignment of the tibial component in the Triathlon knee. J Orthop Surg Res 2011; 6: 44
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Maestro A, Harwin SF, Sandoval MG, Vaquero DH, Murcia A. Influence of intramedullary versus extramedullary alignment guides on final total knee arthroplasty component position: a radiographic analysis. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13 (05) 552-558
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Anderson KC, Buehler KC, Markel DC. Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: comparison with conventional methods. J Arthroplasty 2005; 20 (07) (Suppl. 03) 132-138
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Mason JB, Fehring TK, Estok R, Banel D, Fahrbach K. Meta-analysis of alignment outcomes in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (08) 1097-1106
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Anand S, Harrison JW, Buch KA. Extramedullary or intramedullary tibial alignment guides: a randomised, prospective trial of radiological alignment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003; 85 (07) 1084 , author reply 1084
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 van der List JP, Chawla H, Joskowicz L, Pearle AD. Current state of computer navigation and robotics in unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (11) 3482-3495
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Urish KL, Conditt M, Roche M, Rubash HE. Robotic total knee arthroplasty: surgical assistant for a customized normal kinematic knee. Orthopedics 2016; 39 (05) e822-e827
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Banerjee S, Cherian JJ, Elmallah RK, Jauregui JJ, Pierce TP, Mont MA. Robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty. Expert Rev Med Devices 2015; 12 (06) 727-735
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Schiraldi M, Bonzanini G, Chirillo D, de Tullio V. Mechanical and kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Ann Transl Med 2016; 4 (07) 130
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Cherian JJ, Kapadia BH, Banerjee S, Jauregui JJ, Issa K, Mont MA. Mechanical, anatomical, and kinematic axis in TKA: concepts and practical applications. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2014; 7 (02) 89-95
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Berend ME, Ritter MA, Meding JB. , et al. Tibial component failure mechanisms in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (428) 26-34
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Sikorski JM. Alignment in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90 (09) 1121-1127
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Marchand RC, Sodhi N, Khlopas A. , et al. Patient satisfaction outcomes after robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a short-term evaluation. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (09) 849-853
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Patel NK, Kim E, Khlopas A. , et al. What influences how patients rate their hospital stay after total hip arthroplasty?. Surg Technol Int 2017; 30: 405-410
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Chughtai M, Patel NK, Gwam CU. , et al. Do Press Ganey scores correlate with total knee arthroplasty-specific outcome questionnaires in postsurgical patients?. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (9S): S109-S112
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Mistry JB, Chughtai M, Elmallah RK. , et al. What influences how patients rate their hospital after total hip arthroplasty?. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (11) 2422-2425
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Delanois RE, Gwam C, Mistry JB. , et al. Does length of stay influence how patients rate their hospitalization after total hip arthroplasty?. Surg Technol Int 2017; 30: 393-398
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Chughtai M, Jauregui JJ, Mistry JB. , et al. What influences how patients rate their hospital after total knee arthroplasty?. Surg Technol Int 2016; 28: 261-265
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Gwam C, Mistry JB, Piuzzi N. , et al. What influences how patients with depression rate hospital stay after total joint arthroplasty?. Surg Technol Int 2017; 30: 373-378
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Delanois RE, Gwam CU, Mistry JB. , et al. Does gender influence how patients rate their patient experience after total hip arthroplasty?. Hip Int 2018; 28 (01) 40-43
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Scuderi GR, Bourne RB, Noble PC, Benjamin JB, Lonner JH, Scott WN. The new Knee Society Knee Scoring System. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (01) 3-19
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Noble PC, Scuderi GR, Brekke AC. , et al. Development of a new Knee Society Scoring System. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (01) 20-32
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42 (02) 377-381
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Hampp EL, Chughtai M, Scholl LY. , et al. Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrated greater accuracy and precision to plan compared with manual techniques. J Knee Surg 2018. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1641729. [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMed
  • 32 Marchand RC, Sodhi N, Khlopas A. , et al. Coronal correction for severe deformity using robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2018; 31 (01) 2-5
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Sultan AA, Piuzzi N, Khlopas A, Chughtai M, Sodhi N, Mont MA. Utilization of robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty for soft tissue protection. Expert Rev Med Devices 2017; 14 (12) 925-927
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Song EK, Seon JK, Yim JH, Netravali NA, Bargar WL. Robotic-assisted TKA reduces postoperative alignment outliers and improves gap balance compared to conventional TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (01) 118-126
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Song EK, Seon JK, Park SJ, Jung WB, Park HW, Lee GW. Simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty with robotic and conventional techniques: a prospective, randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19 (07) 1069-1076
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar