Learning curve for robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty: our experience with imageless hand-held Navio system

被引:12
|
作者
Vaidya, Narendra [1 ]
Gadekar, Anup [1 ]
Agrawal, Varun O. [1 ]
Jaysingani, Tanmay N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Lokmanya Hosp, Dept Orthopaed, Pune, Maharashtra, India
关键词
Robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty; Learning curve; Operative time; Technology; POSTOPERATIVE ALIGNMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; REPLACEMENT; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1007/s11701-022-01423-8
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
The main purpose of this study was to determine the learning curve of Robotic assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty surgery through assessment of operative time and comparison with that of conventional jig based Total Knee Arthroplasty. The study included our first 75 Robotic assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty and 25 randomly selected conventional jig-based Total knee arthroplasty from June 2017 to December 2017. The 75 cases were divided into 3 groups of 25 consecutive cases. The mean of operative time for each phase and total time was compared between the 3 groups and with the mean of total time for conventional jig based group. In our experience, Robotic assisted Total Knee arthroplasty was associated with a learning curve of approximately 25 cases. The mean for Registration phase of Group A (1st set of 25 cases) was 6.12 min (SD 1.8 min), group B (2nd set of 25 cases) was 4.46 min (SD 0.79 min) and group C (3rd set of 25 cases) was 4.17 min (SD 0.59 min). The mean for Planning phase of group A was 5.08 min (SD 1.01 min), group B was 4.04 min (SD 0.37 min) and group C was 4.01 min (SD 0.35 min). The mean for Cutting Phase of group A was 28.22 min (SD 6.24 min), group B was 22.49 min (SD 0.79 min) and group C was 22.36 min (SD 0.88 min). The mean for total time of group A was 39.42 min (SD 8.02), group B was 31 min (SD 1.22 min), group C was 30.53 min (SD 1.14 min) and conventional group was 30.54 min (SD 1.14 min). On comparing the Registration phase (Group A vs B, p < 0.001; Group B vs C, p 0.14; Group A vs C, p < 0.001), Planning phase (Group A vs B, p < 0.001; Group B vs C, p 0.75; Group A vs C, p < 0.001), Cutting phase (Group A vs B, p < 0.001; Group B vs C, p 0.58; Group A vs C, p < 0.001) and Total time (Group A vs B, p < 0.001; Group B vs C, p 0.74; Group A vs C, p < 0.001; Group A vs Conventional, p < 0.001; Group B vs Conventional, p 0.17, Group C vs Conventional, p 0.99), the results showed that the inflection point for learning curve in our hands was 25 cases. The learning curve and increased operation theatre time are likely to be major barrier in widespread acceptance of robotic technology amongst arthroplasty surgeons. We, in our experience can say that the learning curve was approximately 25 cases. The results of this study will help the arthroplasty surgeons in accepting this technology and achieve better outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:393 / 403
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Learning curve for active robotic total knee arthroplasty
    Mahure, Siddharth A.
    Teo, Greg Michael
    Kissin, Yair D.
    Stulberg, Bernard N.
    Kreuzer, Stefan
    Long, William J.
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2022, 30 (08) : 2666 - 2676
  • [22] Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With an Imageless, Second-Generation Robotic System
    Cochrane, Niall H.
    Kim, Billy I.
    Stauffer, Taylor P.
    Hallows, Rhett K.
    Urish, Kenneth L.
    Alba, Jaime A. Carvajal
    Seyler, Thorsten M.
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2024, 39 (08): : S276 - S280
  • [23] Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty has a learning curve of seven cases for integration into the surgical workflow but no learning curve effect for accuracy of implant positioning
    Kayani, Babar
    Konan, S.
    Huq, S. S.
    Tahmassebi, J.
    Haddad, F. S.
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2019, 27 (04) : 1132 - 1141
  • [24] Robotic-assisted unicompartimental knee arthroplasty performed with Navio system: a systematic review
    Are, L.
    De Mauro, D.
    Rovere, G.
    Fresta, L.
    Tartarone, M.
    Illuminati, A.
    Smakaj, A.
    Maccauro, G.
    Liuzza, F.
    EUROPEAN REVIEW FOR MEDICAL AND PHARMACOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2023, 27 (06) : 2624 - 2633
  • [25] Complications and Learning Curve Associated with an Imageless Burr-Based (CORI) Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty System: Results from First 500 Cases
    Weaver, Douglas J.
    Deshmukh, Shobit
    Bashyal, Ravi
    Bagaria, Vaibhav
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS, 2024, 58 (08) : 1109 - 1117
  • [26] The Learning Curve Associated With Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty
    Redmond, John M.
    Gupta, Asheesh
    Hammarstedt, Jon E.
    Petrakos, Alexandra E.
    Finch, Nathan A.
    Domb, Benjamin G.
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2015, 30 (01): : 50 - 54
  • [27] A Cost Analysis of Traditional Versus Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty Performed With an Imageless, Second-generation Robotic System
    Leal, Jaustin
    Cochrane, Niall H.
    Kim, Billy I.
    Holland, Christopher T.
    Hallows, Rhett
    Seyler, Thorsten
    ORTHOPEDICS, 2024, 47 (06) : 365 - +
  • [28] Learning Curve of Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty for Non-Fellowship-Trained Orthopedic Surgeons
    Ali, Muzaffar
    Phillips, David
    Kamson, Anthony
    Nivar, Isaac
    Dahl, Raymond
    Hallock, Richard
    ARTHROPLASTY TODAY, 2022, 13 : 194 - 198
  • [29] Predictability of implant sizes during cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty using an image-free hand-held robotic system
    Eachempati, Krishna Kiran
    Parameswaran, Apurve
    Apsingi, Sunil
    Ponnala, Vinay Kishore
    Agrawal, Shashwat
    Sheth, Neil P.
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2024, 18 (01)
  • [30] Initial Learning Curve for Robot-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty in a Dedicated Orthopedics Center
    Dragosloveanu, Serban
    Petre, Mihnea-Alexandru
    Capitanu, Bogdan Sorin
    Dragosloveanu, Christiana Diana Maria
    Cergan, Romica
    Scheau, Cristian
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (21)