Robotic Guidance Does Not Improve Component Position or Short-Term Outcome in Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

(iv) Technology assisted unicompartmental knee replacement: results and functional outcomes

“…In contrast, a more recent retrospective matched study by Hansen et al 30 compared 30 robot assisted MAKO UKRs to 32 conventional UKRs. They found the longer operative time in the robot assisted UKR group was statistically significant although there was no difference in blood loss, tourniquet time or intraoperative complications.…”

Innovations in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Improved Technical Precision, But Unclear Clinical Benefits

“…25,26 Although the value for TKA procedures was considered, the comparisons of robotic CAS, navigation CAS, and instrumented surgery were initially described for unicompartmental arthroplasty, with improvement in coronal plane alignment, sagittal plane alignment, and individual unicompartmental arthroplasty component position reported in some studies. [27][28][29] In contrast, Hansen et al 30 reported no significant differences in unicompartmental arthroplasty component position, fixation, or clinical outcomes. 30 There appear to have been substantive improvements in robotic-assisted TKA.…”

“…[27][28][29] In contrast, Hansen et al 30 reported no significant differences in unicompartmental arthroplasty component position, fixation, or clinical outcomes. 30 There appear to have been substantive improvements in robotic-assisted TKA. The first generation of robotic-assisted surgery was associated with improved component alignment, but a higher rate of surgical complications than conventional TKA.…”

Implementation of robotics in total joint arthroplasty

“…Additionally, some have suggested that the improvements seen with robotic assistance are minimal and hence not worth the large economic investment. 46 These arguments are valid; however, we believe that with the increasing use of these systems, surgeons will become more comfortable with them leading to greater improvements in radiographic and clinical outcomes. Furthermore, Pearle et al believe that the learning curve for the use of these robots may be shorter, especially for surgeons in the early stages of their training.…”

“…The first of these includes the increased operative setup time because of the need to prepare the robot and all of the associated accessories. One study (Hansen et al 46 ) found that the use of robotic UKA versus manual UKA increased operative time by an average of 20 minutes. According to Hansen et al, 46 this could represent an increased cost of US $2,466-$9,220.…”