Introduction. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has demonstrated significant benefits, including improved accuracy of component positioning compared to
Aims. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has been introduced to provide accurate bone cuts and help achieve the target knee alignment, along with symmetric gap balancing. The purpose of this study was to determine if any early clinical benefits could be realized following TKA using robotic-assisted technology. Methods. In all, 140 consecutive patients undergoing RA-TKA and 127 consecutive patients undergoing
Aims. Around the world, the emergence of robotic technology has improved surgical precision and accuracy in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This territory-wide study compares the results of various robotic TKA (R-TKA) systems with those of
Introduction. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was introduced to improve limb alignment, component positioning, and soft-tissue balance, yet the effect of adoption of this technology has not been established. This study was designed to evaluate whether robotic-assisted TKA leads to improved patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient satisfaction as compared to
Objective. Computer-assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty (CAMI-TKA) has gained increasing interest from orthopaedic surgeons due to its advantages in improving accuracy of component placement combined with benefits in postoperative recovery due to a smaller incision. However, long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes are lacking. The purpose of the present study is to compare the long-term radiographic features and functional outcomes between patients who underwent CAMI-TKA and those who underwent
Recent advancements in optical navigated TKA have shown improved overall limb alignment, implant placement and reduced outliers compared to
This RCT compared electromagnetic (EM) navigated and
INTRODUCTION. Total knee replacement is mostly done with alignment rods in order to achieve a proper Varus / Valgus alignement. Other techniques are computer assisted navigation or MRI based preoperative planning. iASSIST™ is a computer assisted stereotaxic surgical instrument system to assist the surgeon in the positioning of the orthopaedic implant system components intra-operatively. It is imageless and the communication between the PC and the “Pod's” does not require any direct camera view, it is a bluethooth comunication system. This study presents preliminary results utilizing iASSIST™. The aim of this study was to test and compare radiographic alignment, functional outcomes, and perioperative morbidity of the iASSIST™ Knee system versus
Few previous studies showed that the
Electromagnetic navigation versus
Systemic embolic phenomena are well recognised during total knee replacement (TKR) and are widely believed to be the cause of intra-operative hypotension and reduced cardiac output, which may lead to circulatory collapse and sudden death. We undertook a prospective, double-blind, randomised study comparing the cardiac embolic load during computer-assisted and
Background: Computer-assisted navigation systems are supposed to improve the precision of implant positioning and therefore the longevity of the knee arthroplasty. Several studies have demonstrated a better mechanical axis or axial component alignment in navigated compared to
We report our five-year functional results comparing navigated and
We previously compared component alignment in total knee replacement using a computer-navigated technique with a conventional jig based method. Improved alignment was seen in the computer-navigated group (Beaver et al. JBJS 2004 (86B); 3: 372–7.). We also reported two-year results showing no difference in clinical outcome between the two groups (Beaver et al. JBJS 2007 (89B); 4: 477–80). We now report our five-year functional results comparing navigated and
Introduction: We previously compared component alignment in total knee replacement using a computer-navigated technique with a conventional jig based method. Improved alignment was seen in the computer-navigated group (Beaver et al. JBJS 2004 (86B); 3: 372–7.). We also reported two-year results showing no difference in clinical outcome between the two groups (Beaver et al. JBJS 2007 (89B); 4: 477–80). We now report our five-year functional results comparing navigated and
Among many factors that influence the outcomes of Total Knee Arthroplasties (TKAs), the mechanical alignment has played major roles for the success of TKA, the survival rates of the implants, and patient functionality. Most, but not all, studies have shown that alignment of the mechanical axis in the coronal plane within a range of 3° varus/valgus is associated with improved long-term function and increased survival rates. Robot-assisted TKA has been developed to improve improves the accuracy and precision of component implantation and mechanical axis (MA) alignment. We hypothesised that robot-assisted TKA would lead to a more accurate leg alignment and component implantation, and thus, improve radiological and clinical outcomes. Between January 2003 and December 2004, a total of 98 primary TKA procedures were compared: 49 using a robotic-assisted procedure and 49 using conventional manual techniques. The cohorts were followed for 121.2 and 119.5 months on average, respectively. Radiographic assessments of the patients were performed preoperatively and at final follow-up and made according to the Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation System (KSRES) which included measurements of the coronal mechanical axis and sagittal and coronal inclinations of femoral and tibial components. The radiographic measurements were made using a PACS (Picture Archiving and Communication System). Clinical assessments were performed preoperatively, and at a final follow-up date that was a minimum of postoperative nine years. The clinical results included ranges of motion (ROM), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) scores, Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) scores (for pain and function). The radiographic results showed no statistical differences when comparing the means of the two groups. When considering outliers (defined as error ≥ ±3°) for the mechanical axis, femoral coronal and sagittal inclinations, and tibial coronal and sagittal inclinations, the ROBODOC group had zero outliers for all measurements except for one in tibial sagittal inclination. On the other hand, the conventional group had 12 outliers for mechanical axis, 2 for femoral coronal inclination, 3 for femoral sagittal inclination, 3 for tibial coronal inclination, and 4 for tibial sagittal inclination. However, there were no statistically significant differences between groups for ROM, HSS, or WOMAC scores at the final follow-up. The results of this study support previous work and demonstrate that the ROBODOC-assisted implantation of TKA results in better radiographic outcomes and better ligament balance with equivalent safety when compared to
A functional total knee replacement has to be well aligned, which implies that it should lie along the mechanical axis and in the correct axial and rotational planes. Incorrect alignment will lead to abnormal wear, early mechanical loosening, and patellofemoral problems. There has been increased interest of late in total knee arthroplasty with robot assistance. This study was conducted to determine if robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty is superior to the conventional surgical method with regard to the precision of implant positioning. Twenty knee replacements of ten robot-assisted and another ten conventional operations were performed on ten cadavers. Two experienced surgeons performed the surgery. Both procedures were undertaken by one surgeon on each cadaver. The choice of which was to be done first was randomized. After the implantation of the prosthesis, the mechanical-axis deviation, femoral coronal angle, tibial coronal angle, femoral sagittal angle, tibial sagittal angle, and femoral rotational alignment were measured via three-dimensional CT scanning. These variants were then compared with the preoperative planned values. In the robot-assisted surgery, the mechanical-axis deviation ranged from −1.94 to 2.13° (mean: −0.21°), the femoral coronal angle ranged from 88.08 to 90.99° (mean: 89.81°), the tibial coronal angle ranged from 89.01 to 92.36° (mean: 90.42°), the tibial sagittal angle ranged from 81.72 to 86.24° (mean: 83.20°), and the femoral rotational alignment ranged from 0.02 to 1.15° (mean: 0.52°) in relation to the transepicondylar axis. In the conventional surgery, the mechanical-axis deviation ranged from −3.19 to 3.84°(mean: −0.48°), the femoral coronal angle ranged from 88.36 to 92.29° (mean: 90.50°), the tibial coronal angle ranged from 88.15 to 91.51° (mean: 89.83°), the tibial sagittal angle ranged from 80.06 to 87.34° (mean: 84.50°), and the femoral rotational alignment ranged from 0.32 to 4.13° (mean: 2.76°) in relation to the transepicondylar axis. In the conventional surgery, there were two cases of outlier outside the range of 3° varus or valgus of the mechanical-axis deviation. The robot-assisted surgery showed significantly superior femoral-rotational-alignment results compared with the conventional surgery (p=0.006). There was no statistically significant difference between robot-assisted and
D-dimer is one of the useful laboratory tests to evaluate the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after the total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The most recent guideline for the prophylaxis of VTE points out the surgical procedure itself is a major risk factor for developing VTE. Only a few literatures discuss the relationship of surgical procedures and the risk of venous thromboembolism. We therefore prospectively compare the difference of the perioperative plasma D-dimer levels between the patients undergoing navigation and convention TKA. Two hundred consecutive total knee arthroplasties were performed between September 2011 and March 2013. The patients were randomised according to their registration to the orthopaedic clinic. Ninety-six patients (100 knees) underwent a navigation-assisted TKA and ninety-four patients (100 knees) had a
Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) is theoretically more accurate for component positioning than TKA performed with mechanical instruments (M-TKA). Furthermore, the ability to quantify soft tissue laxity and adjust the plan prior to bone resection should reduce variability in polyethylene thickness. This study was performed to compare accuracy to plan for component positioning and polyethylene thickness in RA-TKA versus M-TKA. 199 consecutive primary TKAs (96 C-TKA and 103 RA-TKA) performed by a single surgeon were reviewed. Full-length standing and knee radiographs were obtained pre and post-operatively. For M-TKA, measured resection technique was used. Planned coronal plane femoral and tibial component alignment, and overall limb alignment were all 0° to the mechanical axis; tibial posterior slope was 2°; and polyethylene thickness was 9mm. For RA-TKA, individual component position was adjusted to assist balance the gaps but planned coronal plane alignment for the femoral and tibial components and overall limb alignment had to remain 0+/− 3°; planned tibial posterior slope was 1.5°. Planned values and polyethylene thickness for RA-TKA were obtained from the final intra-operative plan. Mean deviations from plan for each parameter were compared between groups (ΔFemur, ΔTibia, ΔPS, and polyethylene thickness) as were distal femoral recut and tourniquet time.Introduction
Methods
Long term survivorship in Total Knee Arthroplasty is significantly dependent on prosthesis alignment. The aim of this study was to determine, compare and analyse the coronal alignment of the tibial component of a single implant system using 3 different techniques. Retrospective study of cases from a prospectively collected database. Radiological assessment included measurement of the coronal alignment of tibial components of total knee arthroplasties, and its deviation from the mechanical axis. A comparison study of intramedullary, extramedullary and tibial crest alignment methods was performed.Abstract
Introduction
Method