Mid-term survivorship and patient-reported outcomes of robotic-arm assisted partial knee arthroplasty A SINGLE-SURGEON STUDY OF 1,018 KNEES

被引:74
作者
Burger, J. A. [1 ]
Kleeblad, L. J. [1 ]
Laas, N. [1 ]
Pearle, A. D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Special Surg, Dept Orthopaed Surg & Comp Assisted Surg, 535 E 70th St, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
NATIONAL JOINT REGISTRY; MATCHED PATIENTS; REVISION; REPLACEMENT; ALIGNMENT; ENGLAND; OBESITY; GAIT;
D O I
10.1302/0301-620X.102B1.BJJ-2019-0510.R1
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Aims Limited evidence is available on mid-term outcomes of robotic-arm assisted (RA) partial knee arthroplasty (PKA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate mid-term survivorship, modes of failure, and patient-reported outcomes of RA PKA. Methods A retrospective review of patients who underwent RA PKA between June 2007 and August 2016 was performed. Patients received a fixed-bearing medial or lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), or bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BiKA; PFA plus medial UKA). All patients completed a questionnaire regarding revision surgery, reoperations, and level of satisfaction. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) were assessed using the KOOS for Joint Replacement Junior survey. Results Mean follow-up was 4.7 years (2.0 to 10.8). Five-year survivorship of medial UKA (n = 802), lateral UKA (n = 171), and PFA/BiKA (n = 35/10) was 97.8%, 97.7%, and 93.3%, respectively. Component loosening and progression of osteoarthritis (OA) were the most common reasons for revision. Mean KOOS scores after medial UKA, lateral UKA, and PFA/BiKA were 84.3 (SD 15.9), 85.6 (SD 14.3), and 78.2 (SD 14.2), respectively. The vast majority of the patients reported high satisfaction levels after RA PKA. Subgroup analyses suggested tibial component design, body mass index (BMI), and age affects RA PKA outcomes. Five-year survivorship was 98.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 97.2 to 99.5) for onlay medial UKA (n = 742) and 99.1% (95% CI 97.9 to 100) for onlay medial UKA in patients with a BMI < 30 kg/m(2) (n = 479). Conclusion This large single-surgeon study showed high mid-term survivorship, satisfaction levels, and functional outcomes in RA UKA using metal-backed tibial onlay components. In addition, favourable results were reported in RA PFA and BiKA.
引用
收藏
页码:108 / 116
页数:9
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]   The Avon patellofemoral arthroplasty - Five-year survivorship and functional results [J].
Ackroyd, C. E. ;
Newman, J. H. ;
Evans, R. ;
Eldridge, J. D. J. ;
Joslin, C. C. .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 2007, 89B (03) :310-315
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2017, 14 NJR
[3]   Tibial component alignment and risk of loosening in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a radiographic and radiostereometric study [J].
Barbadoro, P. ;
Ensini, A. ;
Leardini, A. ;
d'Amato, M. ;
Feliciangeli, A. ;
Timoncini, A. ;
Amadei, F. ;
Belvedere, C. ;
Giannini, S. .
KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2014, 22 (12) :3157-3162
[4]   Improved implant position and lower revision rate with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty [J].
Batailler, Cecile ;
White, Nathan ;
Ranaldi, Filippo Maria ;
Neyret, Philippe ;
Servien, Elvire ;
Lustig, Sebastien .
KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2019, 27 (04) :1232-1240
[5]   Improved Accuracy of Component Positioning with Robotic-Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty [J].
Bell, Stuart W. ;
Anthony, Iain ;
Jones, Bryn ;
MacLean, Angus ;
Rowe, Philip ;
Blyth, Mark .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2016, 98 (08) :627-635
[6]   Robotic arm-assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty EXPLORATORY SECONDARY ANALYSIS OF A RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL [J].
Blyth, M. J. G. ;
Anthony, I. ;
Rowe, P. ;
Banger, M. S. ;
MacLean, A. ;
Jones, B. .
BONE & JOINT RESEARCH, 2017, 6 (11) :631-639
[7]   Ten-year survival and seven-year functional results of cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement A prospective consecutive series of our first 1000 cases [J].
Campi, S. ;
Pandit, H. ;
Hooper, G. ;
Snell, D. ;
Jenkins, C. ;
Dodd, C. A. F. ;
Maxwell, R. ;
Murray, D. W. .
KNEE, 2018, 25 (06) :1231-1237
[8]   Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Is robotic technology more accurate than conventional technique? [J].
Citak, Mustafa ;
Suero, Eduardo M. ;
Citak, Musa ;
Dunbar, Nicholas J. ;
Branch, Sharon H. ;
Conditt, Michael A. ;
Banks, Scott A. ;
Pearle, Andrew D. .
KNEE, 2013, 20 (04) :268-271
[9]   Patient, implant, and alignment factors associated with revision of medial compartment unicondylar arthroplasty [J].
Collier, Matthew B. ;
Eickmann, Thomas H. ;
Sukezaki, Fumio ;
McAuley, James P. ;
Engh, Gerard A. .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2006, 21 (06) :108-115
[10]   Revision Analysis of Robotic Arm-Assisted and Manual Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty [J].
Cool, Christina L. ;
Needham, Keith A. ;
Khlopas, Anton ;
Mont, Michael A. .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2019, 34 (05) :926-931