File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Reducing edge loading and alignment outliers with image-free robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a case controlled study

TitleReducing edge loading and alignment outliers with image-free robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a case controlled study
Authors
KeywordsComponent positioning
Early failure
Loosening
Robotic-assisted surgery
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
Issue Date1-Dec-2024
PublisherSpringer Nature
Citation
Arthroplasty, 2024, v. 6, n. 1 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Survivorship of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is technique-dependent. Correct femoral-tibial component positioning associates with improved survivorship. Image-free robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty enables preoperative and intraoperative planning of alignment and assessment of positioning prior to execution. This study aimed to compare the radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted UKA (R-UKA) and conventional UKA (C-UKA). Methods: This retrospective case control study involved 140 UKA (82 C-UKA and 58 R-UKA) performed at an academic institution between March 2016 to November 2020, with a mean follow-up of 3 years. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for mechanical axis and femoral-tibial component position. Component position was measured by two methods: (1) femoral-tibial component contact point with reference to four medial-to-lateral quadrants of the tibial tray and (2) femoral-tibial component contact point deviation from the center of the tibial tray as a percentage of the tibial tray width. Baseline demographics and complications were recorded. Results: There was a higher mean component deviation in C-UKA compared with R-UKA using method 2 (17.2% vs. 12.8%; P = 0.007), but no difference in proportion of zonal outliers using method 1 (4 outliers in C-UKA, 5.1% vs. 1 outlier in R-UKA, 1.8%; P = 0.403). R-UKA showed no difference in mean mechanical alignment (C-UKA 5° vs. R-UKA 5°; P = 0.250). 2-year survivorship was 99% for C-UKA and 97% for R-UKA. Mean operative time was 18 min longer for R-UKA (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Image-free robotic-assisted UKA had improved component medio-lateral alignment compared with conventional technique.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/346493

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLau, Wai Hong-
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Wai Kiu Thomas-
dc.contributor.authorChiu, Kwong Yuen-
dc.contributor.authorCheung, Man Hong-
dc.contributor.authorCheung, Amy-
dc.contributor.authorChan, Ping Keung-
dc.contributor.authorChan, Vincent Wai Kwan-
dc.contributor.authorFu, Henry-
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-17T00:30:58Z-
dc.date.available2024-09-17T00:30:58Z-
dc.date.issued2024-12-01-
dc.identifier.citationArthroplasty, 2024, v. 6, n. 1-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/346493-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Survivorship of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is technique-dependent. Correct femoral-tibial component positioning associates with improved survivorship. Image-free robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty enables preoperative and intraoperative planning of alignment and assessment of positioning prior to execution. This study aimed to compare the radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted UKA (R-UKA) and conventional UKA (C-UKA). Methods: This retrospective case control study involved 140 UKA (82 C-UKA and 58 R-UKA) performed at an academic institution between March 2016 to November 2020, with a mean follow-up of 3 years. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for mechanical axis and femoral-tibial component position. Component position was measured by two methods: (1) femoral-tibial component contact point with reference to four medial-to-lateral quadrants of the tibial tray and (2) femoral-tibial component contact point deviation from the center of the tibial tray as a percentage of the tibial tray width. Baseline demographics and complications were recorded. Results: There was a higher mean component deviation in C-UKA compared with R-UKA using method 2 (17.2% vs. 12.8%; P = 0.007), but no difference in proportion of zonal outliers using method 1 (4 outliers in C-UKA, 5.1% vs. 1 outlier in R-UKA, 1.8%; P = 0.403). R-UKA showed no difference in mean mechanical alignment (C-UKA 5° vs. R-UKA 5°; P = 0.250). 2-year survivorship was 99% for C-UKA and 97% for R-UKA. Mean operative time was 18 min longer for R-UKA (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Image-free robotic-assisted UKA had improved component medio-lateral alignment compared with conventional technique.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSpringer Nature-
dc.relation.ispartofArthroplasty-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectComponent positioning-
dc.subjectEarly failure-
dc.subjectLoosening-
dc.subjectRobotic-assisted surgery-
dc.subjectUnicompartmental knee arthroplasty-
dc.titleReducing edge loading and alignment outliers with image-free robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a case controlled study-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s42836-024-00259-x-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85195506116-
dc.identifier.volume6-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.eissn2524-7948-
dc.identifier.issnl2524-7948-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats