Comparison between standard technique and image-free robotic technique in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Preliminary data

The factors that guarantee the survival of the unicompartmental prosthesis implant seems to be linked to the accurate positioning of the components. The aim of our study is to compare the standard operative technique and the assisted navigation technique to understand if the robotic technology is able to obtain more accurate implants and with a better outcome. In the period between January 2016 and February 2018, in our Clinic, were performed 94 medial unicompartmental knee implants. The implantation of the medial unicompartmental prosthesis was performed in 30 cases with the standard technique and in 29 cases with the image-free robotic technique (Navio Surgical System). The objective of our study was to evaluate the anatomical and mechanical axes, the tibial slope, the coronal inclination of the femoral tibial space, the coronal angulation of the tibial and femoral component and the height of the Joint-Line. Furthermore, to evaluate the outcome we has execute international scores (IKDC and KSS Insall mod.). The advanced navigation seems to allow the implantation of the unicompartmental prosthesis more precisely, although not always with a statistically significant difference compared to the standard technique. further clinical studies are needed to analyze the medium and long-term survival rate, as well as the patient’s subjective outcome. (www.actabiomedica.it)

[1]  J. Lonner,et al.  Robotic-assisted Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Options and Outcomes. , 2019, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[2]  P. Neyret,et al.  Improved joint-line restitution in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using a robotic-assisted surgical technique , 2017, International Orthopaedics.

[3]  E. Vaienti,et al.  Bone scan in painful knee arthroplasty: obsolete or actual examination? , 2017 .

[4]  Y. In,et al.  Differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Unicompartmental and Total Knee Arthroplasties: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis. , 2017, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[5]  A. Pearle,et al.  Annual revision rates of partial versus total knee arthroplasty: A comparative meta-analysis. , 2017, The Knee.

[6]  G. Andersson,et al.  A cost comparison of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty. , 2016, The Knee.

[7]  A. Lombardi,et al.  Early outcomes of twin-peg mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared with primary total knee arthroplasty , 2016, The bone & joint journal.

[8]  A. Pearle,et al.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty: Which type of artificial joint do patients forget? , 2017, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[9]  A. Liddle,et al.  Optimal usage of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 41,986 cases from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. , 2015, The bone & joint journal.

[10]  Frederic Picard,et al.  High Degree of Accuracy of a Novel Image-free Handheld Robot for Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty in a Cadaveric Study , 2015, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[11]  F. Pogliacomi,et al.  High tibial osteotomy: our experience with hemicallotasis method. , 2014, Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis.

[12]  Philip E Riches,et al.  Accuracy of a freehand sculpting tool for unicondylar knee replacement , 2014, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[13]  J. G. Bonnin,et al.  ARTHROPLASTY , 1956, Der Orthopade.

[14]  J. Cobb,et al.  Robotic Assistance Enables Inexperienced Surgeons to Perform Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties on Dry Bone Models with Accuracy Superior to Conventional Methods , 2013, Advances in orthopedics.

[15]  V. Sauleau,et al.  Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: does tibial component position influence clinical outcomes and arthroplasty survival? , 2013, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[16]  Michael A Conditt,et al.  Accuracy of dynamic tactile-guided unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. , 2012, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[17]  M Jakopec,et al.  Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.