Dataset Information

Comparison of Robotic and Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes in Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT: Robotic-arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RUKA) was developed to increase the accuracy of bone alignment and implant positioning. This retrospective study explored whether RUKA has more favorable overall outcomes than conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CUKA). A total of 158 patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis were recruited, of which 85 had undergone RUKA with the Mako system and 73 had undergone CUKA. The accuracy of component positioning and bone anatomical alignment was compared using preoperative and postoperative radiograph. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using questionnaires, which the patients completed preoperatively and then postoperatively at six months, one year, and two years. In total, 52 patients from the RUKA group and 61 from the CUKA group were eligible for analysis. The preoperative health scores and Kellgren-Lawrence scores were higher in the RUKA group. RUKA exhibited higher implant positioning accuracy, thus providing a superior femoral implant angle, properly aligned implant placement, and a low rate of overhang. RUKA also achieved higher accuracy in bone anatomical alignment (tibial axis angle and anatomical axis angle) than CUKA, but surgical time was longer, and blood loss was greater. No significant differences were observed in the clinical outcomes of the two procedures.

SUBMITTER: Wu C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8745819 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Robotic and Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes in Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Wu Christopher C Fukui Nobuei N Lin Yen-Kuang YK Lee Ching-Yu CY Chou Shih-Hsiang SH Huang Tsung-Jen TJ Chen Jen-Yuh JY Wu Meng-Huang MH

Journal of clinical medicine 20211231 1

Robotic-arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RUKA) was developed to increase the accuracy of bone alignment and implant positioning. This retrospective study explored whether RUKA has more favorable overall outcomes than conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CUKA). A total of 158 patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis were recruited, of which 85 had undergone RUKA with the Mako system and 73 had undergone CUKA. The accuracy of component positioning and bone anatom ...[more]

PMID: 35011960

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThis retrospective study aims to analyse the survivorship and functional outcomes of two samples with similar preoperative clinical and demographic data of lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) performed with robotic and conventional surgery at a minimum 5-year follow-up.MethodsIn this retrospective study, the clinical records of two cohorts for 95 lateral UKA implants were analysed. The first cohort consisted of 43 patients with cemented lateral UKA performed with the conventional procedure (Conventional group). The second cohort consisted of 52 patients who received robot-assisted cemented lateral UKA (Robotic group). Clinical evaluation of the two samples entailed evaluating the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score divided into subscales (symptoms and stiffness, pain, function in daily living, function in sport and recreation and quality of life) for each patient. Revision was defined as the failure of the implant (periprosthetic joint infection, periprosthetic fracture or aseptic loosening), and survival was based on implant revision.ResultsThe mean follow-up time was 90.3 ± 9.1 months for the Conventional Group and 95.4 ± 11.0 months for the Robotic Group (n.s.). Each patient was clinically evaluated on the day before surgery (T0), at a minimum 1-year follow-up (T1) and at a minimum 5-year follow-up (T2). In both groups, all clinical scores improved between T0 and T1 and between T0 and T2 (p < 0.05); for both groups, no differences were noted in any clinical scores between T1 and T2 (n.s.). No significant differences in any clinical score were found between the two groups at each follow-up (n.s.). Survival analysis reported no differences between the two groups at the final 1-year follow-up, with three failures (2 aseptic loosening and 1 periprosthetic fracture) in the Conventional group and two failures (1 patellofemoral osteoarthritis and 1 inexplicable pain) in the Robotic group (n.s.).ConclusionsThis study shows excellent clinical outcomes and revision rates in robotic arm-assisted and manual techniques for lateral UKA, with no clinical differences at medium- to long-term follow-up.Level of evidenceLevel III-comparative study.

Project description:PurposeThe primary goal of this study is to compare clinical outcomes, complication rate, and survivorship in octogenarians who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) by performing a matched cohort analysis.MethodsWe analyzed 75 medial UKAs performed by a single experienced surgeon. The included cases were matched with 75 TKAs performed during the same study period. Potential TKA matches used identical exclusion criteria. UKAs were age-, gender-, and body mass index (BMI)-matched at the rate of 1 UKA to 1 TKA from our departmental database. Clinical evaluation included the visual analog scale for pain, range of motion (ROM-flexion and extension), Knee Society Score (KSS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Each patient was clinically evaluated on the day before the surgery (T0) and at two follow-ups at least 12 months (T1) and 24 months (T2) after the surgery. For the survivorship, revision was defined as failure of the implant (periprosthetic joint infection, periprosthetic fracture, or aseptic loosening), and survival was based on implant revision or patient death. Undesirable clinical developments that were not present at baseline or that increased in severity after treatment were classified as adverse events.ResultsThe mean age at the time of the surgery was 82.1 ± 1.9 years for UKA and 81.5 ± 1.8 years for TKA (p = 0.06). The two groups differed in regard to surgical time (UKA 44.9 ± 7.2 min; TKA 54.4 ± 11.3 min; p < 0.001); furthermore, the UKA group showed better function (ROM; flexion and extension) than the TKA group at each follow-up time point (p < 0.05). Both groups reported a significant improvement in all clinical scores (KSS and OKS) when compared with their preoperative status (p < 0.05), while no differences were found between the groups at each follow-up (p > 0.05). The UKA group reported 7 (9.3%) failures, while TKA reported 6 failures. There were no survival differences between the groups (T1: p = 0.2; T2: p = 0.5). Overall complication rate was 6% in the UKA group versus 9.75% in TKA (p = 0.2).ConclusionThe UKA and TKA patients had similar clinical outcomes, post-operative range of motion, and survivorship in octogenarians with medial knee osteoarthritis, with comparable complication rate. Both the surgical procedures may be considered in this patient population, but further long-term follow-up is needed.Level of evidenceLevel III.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Robotic and Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes in Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Publications

Comparison of Robotic and Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes in Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets