scholarly journals Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved accuracy and patient reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author(s):  
Junren Zhang ◽  
Wofhatwa Solomon Ndou ◽  
Nathan Ng ◽  
Paul Gaston ◽  
Philip M. Simpson ◽  
...  

AbstractThis systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the accuracy of component positioning, alignment and balancing techniques employed, patient-reported outcomes, and complications of robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) with manual TKA (mTKA) and the associated learning curve. Searches of PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar were performed in October 2020 using PRISMA guidelines. Search terms included “robotic”, “knee” and “arthroplasty”. The criteria for inclusion were published clinical research articles reporting the learning curve for RATKA and those comparing the component position accuracy, alignment and balancing techniques, functional outcomes, or complications with mTKA. There were 198 articles identified, following full text screening, 16 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria and reported the learning curve of rTKA (n=5), component positioning accuracy (n=6), alignment and balancing techniques (n=7), functional outcomes (n=7), or complications (n=5). Two studies reported the learning curve using CUSUM analysis to establish an inflexion point for proficiency which ranged from 7 to 11 cases and there was no learning curve for component positioning accuracy. The meta-analysis showed a significantly lower difference between planned component position and implanted component position, and the spread was narrower for RATKA compared with the mTKA group (Femur coronal: mean 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08–1.55, p<0.00001; Tibia coronal: mean 1.56, 95% CI 1.32–1.81, p<0.00001). Three studies reported using different alignment and balancing techniques between mTKA and RATKA, two studies used the same for both group and two studies did not state the methods used in their RATKA groups. RATKA resulted in better Knee Society Score compared to mTKA in the short-to-mid-term follow up (95%CI [− 1.23,  − 0.51], p=0.004). There was no difference in arthrofibrosis, superficial and deep infection, wound dehiscence, or overall complication rates. RATKA demonstrated improved accuracy of component positioning and patient-reported outcomes. The learning curve of RATKA for operating time was between 7 and 11 cases. Future well-powered studies on RATKAs should report on the knee alignment and balancing techniques utilised to enable better comparisons on which techniques maximise patient outcomes.Level of evidence III.

Author(s):  
Junren Zhang ◽  
Wofhatwa Solomon Ndou ◽  
Nathan Ng ◽  
Paul Gaston ◽  
Philip M. Simpson ◽  
...  

A correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06522-x


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 3150
Author(s):  
Jason Trieu ◽  
Daniel J. Gould ◽  
Chris Schilling ◽  
Tim Spelman ◽  
Michelle M. Dowsey ◽  
...  

An increasing number of total knee replacements (TKRs) are being performed in response to the growing burden of osteoarthritis. Patients <65 years of age represent the fastest growing group of TKR recipients and are expected to account for an increasing number of primary and revision procedures. Concerns have been raised about the outcomes that can be expected by this age demographic who are more active, physically demanding, and have longer life expectancies compared to older TKR recipients. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of TKR for osteoarthritis in patients <65 years of age, compared to older individuals. A systematic search of Embase and Medline was conducted to identify studies which examined patient-reported outcomes measured using disease-specific and generic health-related quality of life instruments. Ten studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in this review. These studies comprised 1747 TKRs performed between 1977 and 2014. In the meta-analysis of two prospective studies (288 TKRs), patients <65 years of age were able to attain large and clinically meaningful improvements in pain, function, and quality of life. One of these studies (61 TKRs) suggested that patients <55 years of age attained a larger degree of improvement compared to older individuals. Results into the second postoperative decade were less certain, with some data suggesting a high prevalence of pain and patterns of functional decline. Further research is required to investigate longer-term outcomes following TKR for osteoarthritis in younger patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (6) ◽  
pp. 1009-1020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Ng ◽  
Paul Gaston ◽  
Philip M. Simpson ◽  
Gavin J. Macpherson ◽  
James T. Patton ◽  
...  

Aims The aims of this systematic review were to assess the learning curve of semi-active robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty (rTHA), and to compare the accuracy, patient-reported functional outcomes, complications, and survivorship between rTHA and manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA). Methods Searches of PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar were performed in April 2020 in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. Search terms included “robotic”, “hip”, and “arthroplasty”. The criteria for inclusion were published clinical research articles reporting the learning curve for rTHA (robotic arm-assisted only) and those comparing the implantation accuracy, functional outcomes, survivorship, or complications with mTHA. Results There were 501 articles initially identified from databases and references. Following full text screening, 17 articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria were included. Four studies reported the learning curve of rTHA, 13 studies reported on implant positioning, five on functional outcomes, ten on complications, and four on survivorship. The meta-analysis showed a significantly greater number of cases of acetabular component placement in the safe zone compared with the mTHA group (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.10 to 7.94; p < 0.001) and that rTHA resulted in a significantly better Harris Hip Score compared to mTHA in the short- to mid-term follow-up (95% CI 0.46 to 5.64; p = 0.020). However, there was no difference in infection rates, dislocation rates, overall complication rates, and survival rates at short-term follow-up. Conclusion The learning curve of rTHA was between 12 and 35 cases, which was dependent on the assessment goal, such as operating time, accuracy, and team working. Robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty was associated with improved accuracy of component positioning and functional outcome, however no difference in complication rates or survival were observed at short- to mid-term follow-up. Overall, there remains an absence of high-quality level I evidence and cost analysis comparing rTHA and mTHA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1009–1020.


Author(s):  
Eitan Ingall ◽  
Christian Klemt ◽  
Christopher M. Melnic ◽  
Wayne B. Cohen-Levy ◽  
Venkatsaiakhil Tirumala ◽  
...  

AbstractThis is a retrospective study. Prior studies have characterized the deleterious effects of narcotic use in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While there is an increasing revision arthroplasty burden, data on the effect of narcotic use in the revision surgery setting remain limited. Our aim was to characterize the effect of active narcotic use at the time of revision TKA on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). A total of 330 consecutive patients who underwent revision TKA and completed both pre- and postoperative PROMs was identified. Due to differences in baseline characteristics, 99 opioid users were matched to 198 nonusers using the nearest-neighbor propensity score matching. Pre- and postoperative knee disability and osteoarthritis outcome score physical function (KOOS-PS), patient reported outcomes measurement information system short form (PROMIS SF) physical, PROMIS SF mental, and physical SF 10A scores were evaluated. Opioid use was identified by the medication reconciliation on the day of surgery. Propensity score–matched opioid users had significantly lower preoperative PROMs than the nonuser for KOOS-PS (45.2 vs. 53.8, p < 0.01), PROMIS SF physical (37.2 vs. 42.5, p < 0.01), PROMIS SF mental (44.2 vs. 51.3, p < 0.01), and physical SF 10A (34.1 vs. 36.8, p < 0.01). Postoperatively, opioid-users demonstrated significantly lower scores across all PROMs: KOOS-PS (59.2 vs. 67.2, p < 0.001), PROMIS SF physical (43.2 vs. 52.4, p < 0.001), PROMIS SF mental (47.5 vs. 58.9, p < 0.001), and physical SF 10A (40.5 vs. 49.4, p < 0.001). Propensity score–matched opioid-users demonstrated a significantly smaller absolute increase in scores for PROMIS SF Physical (p = 0.03) and Physical SF 10A (p < 0.01), as well as an increased hospital length of stay (p = 0.04). Patients who are actively taking opioids at the time of revision TKA report significantly lower preoperative and postoperative outcome scores. These patients are more likely to have longer hospital stays. The apparent negative effect on patient reported outcomes after revision TKA provides clinically useful data for surgeons in engaging patients in a preoperative counseling regarding narcotic use prior to revision TKA to optimize outcomes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1087.1-1087
Author(s):  
M. Van den Dikkenberg, Msc ◽  
N. Luurssen-Masurel ◽  
M. Kuijper ◽  
M. R. Kok ◽  
P. De Jong ◽  
...  

Background:The need to involve patient reported outcomes (PROs) in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) increases, since PROs quantify patient relevant outcomes. Although PROs have been incorporated in the core-outcome sets in clinical trials, knowledge about the treatment effects on these PROs is scarce. Therefore, we performed a systematic review on the effects of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), of any type, on relevant PRO domains mentioned in the ICHOM standard set. This might support rheumatologists and RA patients during treatment decisions.Objectives:To get insight in the treatment effects of DMARDs of any type on three PRO domains that matter to patients (pain, activity limitations and fatigue).Methods:A systematic review was performed in Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar. Included were all studies that were published before August 2019 and showed DMARD treatment effects in RA on PROs that are part of the ICHOM standard set. Three Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed for the PRO domains pain, activity limitations and fatigue. Preliminary results of DMARDs (in)directly compared to placebo were visualized by forest plots using R.Results:The search strategy yielded n=5974 articles. After selection was performed by 2 independent researchers, n=70 individual articles representing n=53 studies were extracted, over the three PRO domains; pain (n=31), activity limitations (n=41) and fatigue (n=21). In all RCTs, PROs were only reported as secondary or tertiary endpoints. In figure 1, we show the effects on PROs for any type of DMARD investigated compared to placebo. Overall, DMARDs show a greater reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD); -0.97 – -0.22) and most of them in activity limitations (SMD; -0.81 – 0.56). In fatigue, this clear direction is lacking (SMD; -0.86 – 3.5). csDMARDs and anti-TNF seem to perform slightly, but nog significantly, worse than other bDMARDs and tsDMARDs in the first two domains.Conclusion:Within in this systematic review we report a reduction for DMARDs of any type on the domains of pain and activity limitations compared to placebo. However, results are still preliminary and should be interpreted with care. A more comprehensive network analysis might give a more definitive answer which DMARD performs best.Figure 1.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Steer ◽  
Beth Tippett ◽  
R Nazim Khan ◽  
Dermot Collopy ◽  
Gavin Clark

Abstract Background: A drive to improve functional outcomes for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has led to alternative alignment being used. Functional alignment (FA) uses intraoperative soft tissue tension to determine the optimal position of the prosthesis within the patients soft tissue envelope. Angular limits for bone resections are followed to prevent long term prosthesis failure. This study will use the aid of robotic assistance to plan and implement the final prosthesis position. This method has yet to be compared to the traditional mechanically aligned (MA) knee in a randomised trial. Methods: A blinded randomised control trial with 100 patients will be undertaken via Perth Hip and Knee clinic. Fifty patients will undergo a MA TKA and fifty will undergo a FA TKA. Both alignment techniques will be balanced via computer assisted navigation to assess prosthetic gaps, being achieved via the initial bony resection and further soft tissue releases as required to achieve satisfactory balance. The primary outcome will be the forgotten joint score (FJS) two years after surgery, with secondary outcomes being other patient reported outcome measures, clinical functional assessment, radiographic position and complications. Other data that will be collected will be patient demography (Sex, Age, level of activity) and medical information (grade of knee injury, any other relevant medical information). The linear statistical model will be fitted to the response (FJS), including all the other variables as covariates. Discussion: Many surgeons are utilising alternative alignment techniques with a goal of achieving better functional outcomes for their patients. Currently MA TKA remains the gold standard with good outcomes and excellent longevity. There is no published RCTs comparing FA to MA yet and only two registered studies are planned or currently in progress. This study utilizes a FA technique which differs from the two studies. This study will help determine if FA TKA has superior functional results for patients.Trial registration: This trial has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) http://www.anzctr.org.au: U1111-1257-2291, registered 25th Jan 2021. It is also listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04748510


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 411-418.e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeraj Narula ◽  
Abdul-Aziz Alshahrani ◽  
Yuhong Yuan ◽  
Walter Reinisch ◽  
Jean-Frederic Colombel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document