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
  • [31] Robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty system has a learning curve of 11 cases and increased operating time
    Tay, Mei Lin
    Carter, Matthew
    Bolam, Scott M.
    Zeng, Nina
    Young, Simon W.
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2023, 31 (03) : 793 - 802
  • [32] Time-Based Learning Curve for Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Study
    Chen, Zhongming
    Bhowmik-Stoker, Manoshi
    Palmer, Matthew
    Coppolecchia, Andrea
    Harder, Benjamin
    Mont, Michael A.
    Marchand, Robert C.
    JOURNAL OF KNEE SURGERY, 2023, 36 (08) : 873 - 877
  • [33] The learning curve in robotic assisted knee arthroplasty is flattened by the presence of a surgeon experienced with robotic assisted surgery
    Clemens Schopper
    Philipp Proier
    Matthias Luger
    Tobias Gotterbarm
    Antonio Klasan
    Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2023, 31 : 760 - 767
  • [34] The learning curve in robotic assisted knee arthroplasty is flattened by the presence of a surgeon experienced with robotic assisted surgery
    Schopper, Clemens
    Proier, Philipp
    Luger, Matthias
    Gotterbarm, Tobias
    Klasan, Antonio
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2023, 31 (03) : 760 - 767
  • [35] Factors affecting the Learning Curve in Computer Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty
    Sampath, Shameem A. C.
    Voon, South H.
    Davies, Howard
    2008 30TH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE IEEE ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY, VOLS 1-8, 2008, : 3239 - +
  • [36] Operative Time Learning Curve for an Image-Free Robotic Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Cumulative Sum Analysis
    Pagan, Cale A.
    Karasavvidis, Theofilos
    Siljander, Breana
    Debbi, Eytan M.
    Decook, Charles A.
    Vigdorchik, Jonathan
    ARTHROPLASTY TODAY, 2025, 31
  • [37] Intraoperative joint balancing procedure using an imageless robotic assisted technique does not necessarily result in kinematically aligned bicruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty
    Kaneko, Takao
    Yamamoto, Ayakane
    Takada, Kazutaka
    Yoshizawa, Shu
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2023, 17 (02) : 447 - 456
  • [38] Introduction of ROSA robotic-arm system for total knee arthroplasty is associated with a minimal learning curve for operative time
    Bolam, Scott M.
    Tay, Mei Lin
    Zaidi, Faseeh
    Sidaginamale, Raghavendra P.
    Hanlon, Michael
    Munro, Jacob T.
    Monk, A. Paul
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2022, 9 (01)
  • [39] Introduction of ROSA robotic-arm system for total knee arthroplasty is associated with a minimal learning curve for operative time
    Scott M. Bolam
    Mei Lin Tay
    Faseeh Zaidi
    Raghavendra P. Sidaginamale
    Michael Hanlon
    Jacob T. Munro
    A. Paul Monk
    Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, 9
  • [40] Reliability of measuring hip abductor strength following total knee arthroplasty using a hand-held dynamometer
    Schache, Margaret B.
    McClelland, Jodie A.
    Webster, Kate E.
    DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION, 2016, 38 (06) : 597 - 600