Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2024; 37(01): 008-013
DOI: 10.1055/a-2179-8456
Special Focus Section

No Benefit of Robotic-Assisted over Computer-Assisted Surgery for Achieving Neutral Coronal Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Antonio Klasan 
1   AUVA UKH Steiermark, Graz, Austria
2   Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria
,
Victoria Anelli-Monti
1   AUVA UKH Steiermark, Graz, Austria
,
Stephanie Huber
3   Orthopedic Hospital Speising, Vienna, Austria
4   Michael Ogon Institute, Vienna, Austria
,
Maximillian Zacherl
1   AUVA UKH Steiermark, Graz, Austria
,
Jochen Hofstaetter
3   Orthopedic Hospital Speising, Vienna, Austria
4   Michael Ogon Institute, Vienna, Austria
,
Christian Kammerlander
1   AUVA UKH Steiermark, Graz, Austria
,
Patrick Sadoghi
5   Department for Orthopedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is becoming increasingly popular due to better precision, potentially superior outcomes and the ability to achieve alternative alignment strategies. The most commonly used alignment strategy with RAS is a modification of mechanical alignment (MA), labeled adjusted MA (aMA). This strategy allows slight joint line obliquity of the tibial component to achieve superior balancing. In the present study, we compared coronal alignment after TKA using RAS with aMA and computer-assisted surgery (CAS) with MA that has been the standard in the center for more than 10 years. We analyzed a prospectively collected database of patients undergoing TKA in a single center. Lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) were compared for both techniques. In 140 patients, 68 CASs and 72 RASs, we observed no difference in postoperative measurements (median 90 degrees for all, LDFA p = 0.676, MPTA p = 0.947) and no difference in outliers <2 degrees (LDFA p = 0.540, MPTA p = 0.250). The present study demonstrates no benefit in eliminating outliers or achieving neutral alignment of both the femoral and the tibial components in robotic-assisted versus computer-assisted TKA if MA is the target. To utilize the precision of RAS, it is recommended to aim for more personalized alignment strategies. The level of evidence is level III retrospective study.

Keywords

arthroplasty - robotics - navigation


Publication History

Received: 13 July 2023

Accepted: 20 September 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
21 September 2023

Article published online:
12 October 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Price AJ, Alvand A, Troelsen A. et al. Knee replacement. Lancet 2018; 392 (10158): 1672-1682
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Insall JN, Binazzi R, Soudry M, Mestriner LA. Total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985; (192) 13-22
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Saragaglia D, Rubens-Duval B, Gaillot J, Lateur G, Pailhé R. Total knee arthroplasties from the origin to navigation: history, rationale, indications. Int Orthop 2019; 43 (03) 597-604
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Rhee SJ, Kim HJ, Lee CR, Kim CW, Gwak HC, Kim JH. A comparison of long-term outcomes of computer-navigated and conventional total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2019; 101 (20) 1875-1885
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Dunbar MJ, Richardson G, Robertsson O. I can't get no satisfaction after my total knee replacement: rhymes and reasons. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B (11, suppl A): 148-152
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Huber S, Mitterer JA, Vallant SM. et al. Gender-specific distribution of knee morphology according to CPAK and functional phenotype classification: analysis of 8739 osteoarthritic knees prior to total knee arthroplasty using artificial intelligence. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31 (10) 4220-4230
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Winnock de Grave P, Luyckx T, Claeys K. et al. Higher satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty using restricted inverse kinematic alignment compared to adjusted mechanical alignment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (02) 488-499
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Shatrov J, Battelier C, Sappey-Marinier E, Gunst S, Servien E, Lustig S. Functional alignment philosophy in total knee arthroplasty - rationale and technique for the varus morphotype using a CT based robotic platform and individualized planning. SICOT J 2022; 8: 11
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Parratte S, Price AJ, Jeys LM, Jackson WF, Clarke HD. Accuracy of a new robotically assisted technique for total knee arthroplasty: a cadaveric study. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34 (11) 2799-2803
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Thilak J, Babu BC, Thadi M. et al. 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 2021; 55 (04) 953-960
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Lee YM, Kim GW, Lee CY, Song EK, Seon JK. No difference in clinical outcomes and survivorship for robotic, navigational, and conventional primary total knee arthroplasty with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. Clin Orthop Surg 2023; 15 (01) 82-91
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Sires JD, Craik JD, Wilson CJ. Accuracy of bone resection in MAKO total knee robotic-assisted surgery. J Knee Surg 2021; 34 (07) 745-748
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Schopper C, Proier P, Luger M, Gotterbarm T, Klasan A. The learning curve in robotic assisted knee arthroplasty is flattened by the presence of a surgeon experienced with robotic assisted surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31 (03) 760-767
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Yau WP, Leung A, Liu KG, Yan CH, Wong LLS, Chiu KY. Interobserver and intra-observer errors in obtaining visually selected anatomical landmarks during registration process in non-image-based navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (08) 1150-1161
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Klasan A, Putnis SE, Grasso S, Neri T, Coolican MR. Conventional instruments are more accurate for measuring the depth of the tibial cut than computer-assisted surgery in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2020; 140 (06) 801-806
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Roche M. The MAKO robotic-arm knee arthroplasty system. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2021; 141 (12) 2043-2047
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Itou J, Itoh M, Kuwashima U, Okazaki K. Lateral joint tightness in flexion following cementless mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty decreases patient-reported outcome measures and postoperative range of motion. J ISAKOS 2023; S2059-7754 (23)00519–9
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Lustig S, Graichen H. et al. A safe transition to a more personalized alignment in total knee arthroplasty: the importance of a “safe zone” concept. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (02) 365-367
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Graichen H, Luderer V, Strauch M, Hirschmann MT, Scior W. Navigated, gap-balanced, adjusted mechanical alignment achieves alignment and balancing goals in a very high percentage but with partially non-anatomical resections. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31 (03) 768-776
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Young SW, Clark GW, Esposito CI, Carter M, Walker ML. The effect of minor adjustments to tibial and femoral component position on soft tissue balance in robotic total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2023; 38 (6S): S238-S245
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Zhang J, Ndou WS, Ng N. et al. Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved accuracy and patient reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (08) 2677-2695
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Pannu TS, Villa JM, Schultz I, Barsoum WK, Higuera CA, Patel PD. The learning curve of reaching the planned limb alignment in robotic-arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2023; 36 (06) 682-688
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Kayani B, Konan S, Huq SS, Tahmassebi J, Haddad FS. 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 2019; 27 (04) 1132-1141
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Marchand KB, Ehiorobo J, Mathew KK, Marchand RC, Mont MA. Learning curve of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty for a high-volume surgeon. J Knee Surg 2022; 35 (04) 409-415
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Waterson H, Walker R, Koopmans P. et al. Gap balanced adjusted mechanical alignment versus measured resection mechanical alignment: a randomised controlled trial. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2023; 143 (04) 2141-2151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Samuel LT, Karnuta JM, Banerjee A. et al. Robotic arm-assisted versus manual total knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched analysis. J Knee Surg 2023; 36 (01) 105-114
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Ali M, Kamson A, Yoo C, Singh I, Ferguson C, Dahl R. Early superior clinical outcomes in robotic-assisted TKA compared to conventional TKA in the same patient: a comparative analysis. J Knee Surg 2023; 36 (08) 814-819
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar