Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 10/2021

01-10-2021 | KNEE

Robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: high survivorship and good patient-related outcomes at a minimum five years of follow-up

Authors: Francesco Zambianchi, Valerio Daffara, Giorgio Franceschi, Federico Banchelli, Andrea Marcovigi, Fabio Catani

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 10/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RA-UKA) has been shown to improve component placement, reduce intraoperative variability, increase patient satisfaction and improve short-term survivorship results. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the incidence of revision and the clinical performance at a minimum of 5-year follow-up for a cohort of patients who received a medial RA-UKA.

Methods

Between April 2011 and July 2013, a total of 254 patients underwent medial RA-UKA at a single centre. Clinical performance was investigated using the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) and a 5-level Likert scale made of five items to assess joint perception and patient satisfaction. Kaplan–Meier implant survivorship was calculated and reasons for revision were collected. The effect of age, gender and body mass index (BMI) on the probability of reporting high FJS-12 and satisfaction were assessed.

Results

After considering exclusion criteria and loss to follow-up, a total of 216 patients (224 medial RA-UKAs) were assessed at a mean 5.9 years of follow-up. Five RA-UKAs underwent implant revision, resulting in an overall Kaplan–Meier survivorship of 97.8%. Unexplained knee pain (0.9%) was the most common reason for RA-UKA revision. Good-to-excellent FJS-12 scores and high satisfaction levels were reported at mid-term follow-up. Male patients had higher probability of having FJS-12 > 90 (p < 0.05) and high satisfaction levels (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

RA-UKAs demonstrated high survivorship and good-to-excellent patient-reported outcome measures and satisfaction levels at minimum 5-year follow-up. Results for male patients had improved clinical performance when compared to female subjects.

Level of evidence

IV.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Barbadoro P, Ensini A, Leardini A, d’Amato M, Feliciangeli A, Timoncini A, Amadei F, Belvedere C, Giannini S (2014) Tibial component alignment and risk of loosening in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a radiographic and radiostereometric study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:3157–3162CrossRef Barbadoro P, Ensini A, Leardini A, d’Amato M, Feliciangeli A, Timoncini A, Amadei F, Belvedere C, Giannini S (2014) Tibial component alignment and risk of loosening in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a radiographic and radiostereometric study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:3157–3162CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS (2012) The “forgotten joint” as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty 27:430–436.e1CrossRef Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS (2012) The “forgotten joint” as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty 27:430–436.e1CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Bell SW, Anthony I, Jones B, MacLean A, Rowe P, Blyth M (2016) Improved accuracy of component positioning with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98(8):627–635CrossRef Bell SW, Anthony I, Jones B, MacLean A, Rowe P, Blyth M (2016) Improved accuracy of component positioning with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98(8):627–635CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Burger JA, Kleeblad LJ, Laas N, Pearle AD (2020) Mid-term survivorship and patient related outcome measures of robotic arm assisted partial knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 102(1):108–116CrossRef Burger JA, Kleeblad LJ, Laas N, Pearle AD (2020) Mid-term survivorship and patient related outcome measures of robotic arm assisted partial knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 102(1):108–116CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Burn E, Sanchez-Santos MT, Pandit HG, Hamilton TW, Liddle AD, Murray DW, Pinedo-Villanueva R (2018) Ten-year patient-reported outcomes following total and minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched cohort analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(5):1455–1464CrossRef Burn E, Sanchez-Santos MT, Pandit HG, Hamilton TW, Liddle AD, Murray DW, Pinedo-Villanueva R (2018) Ten-year patient-reported outcomes following total and minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched cohort analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(5):1455–1464CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Chatellard R, Sauleau V, Colmar M, Robert H, Raynaud G, Brilhault J (2013) Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Does tibial component position influence clinical outcomes and arthroplasty survival? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(4 Suppl):S219–S225CrossRef Chatellard R, Sauleau V, Colmar M, Robert H, Raynaud G, Brilhault J (2013) Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Does tibial component position influence clinical outcomes and arthroplasty survival? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(4 Suppl):S219–S225CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Chawla H, van der List JP, Christ AB, Sobrero MR, Zuiderbaan HA, Pearle AD (2017) Annual revision rates of partial versus total knee arthroplasty: A comparative meta-analysis. Knee 24(2):179–190CrossRef Chawla H, van der List JP, Christ AB, Sobrero MR, Zuiderbaan HA, Pearle AD (2017) Annual revision rates of partial versus total knee arthroplasty: A comparative meta-analysis. Knee 24(2):179–190CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dunbar NJ, Roche MW, Park BH, Branch SH, Conditt MA, Banks SA (2012) Accuracy of dynamic tactile-guided unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 27(5):803–8.e1CrossRef Dunbar NJ, Roche MW, Park BH, Branch SH, Conditt MA, Banks SA (2012) Accuracy of dynamic tactile-guided unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 27(5):803–8.e1CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Epinette JA, Brunschweiler B, Mertl P, Mole D, Cazenave A (2012) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty modes of failure: Wear is not the main reason for failure: A multicentre study of 418 failed knees. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 98(6 Suppl):S124–S130CrossRef Epinette JA, Brunschweiler B, Mertl P, Mole D, Cazenave A (2012) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty modes of failure: Wear is not the main reason for failure: A multicentre study of 418 failed knees. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 98(6 Suppl):S124–S130CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Giesinger K, Hamilton DF, Jost B, Holzner B, Giesinger JM (2014) Comparative responsiveness of outcome measures for total knee arthroplasty. Osteoarthr Cartilage 22(2):184–189CrossRef Giesinger K, Hamilton DF, Jost B, Holzner B, Giesinger JM (2014) Comparative responsiveness of outcome measures for total knee arthroplasty. Osteoarthr Cartilage 22(2):184–189CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Gilmour A, MacLean AD, Rowe PJ, Banger MS, Donnelly I, Jones BG, Blyth MJG (2018) Robotic-arm-assisted vs conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The 2-year clinical outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty 33(7S):S109–S115CrossRef Gilmour A, MacLean AD, Rowe PJ, Banger MS, Donnelly I, Jones BG, Blyth MJG (2018) Robotic-arm-assisted vs conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The 2-year clinical outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty 33(7S):S109–S115CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hamilton WG, Ammeen DJ, Hopper RH (2014) Mid-Term survivorship of minimally invasive unicompartmental arthroplasty with a fixed-bearing implant: Revision rate and mechanisms of failure. J Arthroplasty 29(5):989–992CrossRef Hamilton WG, Ammeen DJ, Hopper RH (2014) Mid-Term survivorship of minimally invasive unicompartmental arthroplasty with a fixed-bearing implant: Revision rate and mechanisms of failure. J Arthroplasty 29(5):989–992CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kayani B, Konan S, Tahmassebi J, Rowan FE, Haddad FS (2019) An assessment of early functional rehabilitation and hospital discharge in conventional versus robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 101(1):24–33CrossRef Kayani B, Konan S, Tahmassebi J, Rowan FE, Haddad FS (2019) An assessment of early functional rehabilitation and hospital discharge in conventional versus robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 101(1):24–33CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Kim SJ, Postigo R, Koo S, Kim JH (2014) Causes of revision following Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(8):1895–1901CrossRef Kim SJ, Postigo R, Koo S, Kim JH (2014) Causes of revision following Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(8):1895–1901CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Kleeblad LJ, Borus TA, Coon TM, Dounchis J, Nguyen JT, Pearle AD (2018) Midterm survivorship and patient satisfaction of robotic-arm-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicenter study. J Arthroplasty 33(6):1719–1726CrossRef Kleeblad LJ, Borus TA, Coon TM, Dounchis J, Nguyen JT, Pearle AD (2018) Midterm survivorship and patient satisfaction of robotic-arm-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicenter study. J Arthroplasty 33(6):1719–1726CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Liddle AD, Pandit H, Judge A, Murray DW (2015) Optimal usage of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A study of 41 986 cases from the national joint registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J 97(11):1506–1511CrossRef Liddle AD, Pandit H, Judge A, Murray DW (2015) Optimal usage of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A study of 41 986 cases from the national joint registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J 97(11):1506–1511CrossRef
17.
go back to reference van der List JP, Chawla H, Villa JC, Pearle AD (2016) Different optimal alignment but equivalent functional outcomes in medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 23(6):987–995CrossRef van der List JP, Chawla H, Villa JC, Pearle AD (2016) Different optimal alignment but equivalent functional outcomes in medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 23(6):987–995CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Lonner JH, John TK, Conditt MA (2010) Robotic arm-assisted UKA improves tibial component alignment: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(1):141–146CrossRef Lonner JH, John TK, Conditt MA (2010) Robotic arm-assisted UKA improves tibial component alignment: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(1):141–146CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Lustig S, Barba N, Magnussen RA, Servien E, Demey G, Neyret P (2012) The effect of gender on outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 19(3):176–179CrossRef Lustig S, Barba N, Magnussen RA, Servien E, Demey G, Neyret P (2012) The effect of gender on outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 19(3):176–179CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Mofidi A, Plate JF, Lu B, Conditt MA, Lang JE, Poehling GG, Jinnah RH (2014) Assessment of accuracy of robotically assisted unicompartmental arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(8):1918–1925CrossRef Mofidi A, Plate JF, Lu B, Conditt MA, Lang JE, Poehling GG, Jinnah RH (2014) Assessment of accuracy of robotically assisted unicompartmental arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(8):1918–1925CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Moschetti WE, Konopka JF, Rubash HE, Genuario JW (2016) Can robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty be cost-effective? A markov decision analysis. J Arthroplasty 31(4):759–765CrossRef Moschetti WE, Konopka JF, Rubash HE, Genuario JW (2016) Can robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty be cost-effective? A markov decision analysis. J Arthroplasty 31(4):759–765CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Palumbo BT, Scott RD (2014) Diagnosis and indications for treatment of unicompartmental arthritis. Clin Sports Med 33(1):11–21CrossRef Palumbo BT, Scott RD (2014) Diagnosis and indications for treatment of unicompartmental arthritis. Clin Sports Med 33(1):11–21CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Pearle AD, van der List JP, Lee L, Coon TM, Borus TA, Roche MW (2017) Survivorship and patient satisfaction of robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum two-year follow-up. Knee 24(2):419–428CrossRef Pearle AD, van der List JP, Lee L, Coon TM, Borus TA, Roche MW (2017) Survivorship and patient satisfaction of robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum two-year follow-up. Knee 24(2):419–428CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Rauck RC, Blevins JL, Cross MB (2018) Component placement accuracy in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is improved with robotic-assisted surgery: will it have an effect on outcomes? HSS J 14(2):211–213CrossRef Rauck RC, Blevins JL, Cross MB (2018) Component placement accuracy in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is improved with robotic-assisted surgery: will it have an effect on outcomes? HSS J 14(2):211–213CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Redish MH, Fennema P (2018) Good results with minimally invasive unicompartmental knee resurfacing after 10-year follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28(5):959–965CrossRef Redish MH, Fennema P (2018) Good results with minimally invasive unicompartmental knee resurfacing after 10-year follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28(5):959–965CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Repicci JAMD (2003) Total knee or uni? Benefits and limitations of the unicondylar knee prosthesis. Orthopedics 26(3):274–277CrossRef Repicci JAMD (2003) Total knee or uni? Benefits and limitations of the unicondylar knee prosthesis. Orthopedics 26(3):274–277CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Rothwell A, Hobbs T, Frampton C, Taylor J, Muir D, Mohammed K (2017) The New Zealand Joint Registry 2017 Annual report 186 Rothwell A, Hobbs T, Frampton C, Taylor J, Muir D, Mohammed K (2017) The New Zealand Joint Registry 2017 Annual report 186
28.
go back to reference Schwab PE, Lavand’homme P, Yombi JC, Thienpont E (2015) Lower blood loss after unicompartmental than total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(12):3494–3500CrossRef Schwab PE, Lavand’homme P, Yombi JC, Thienpont E (2015) Lower blood loss after unicompartmental than total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(12):3494–3500CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Smith JRA, Robinson JR, Porteous AJ, Murray JRD, Hassaballa MA, Artz N, Newman JH (2014) Fixed bearing lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-Short to midterm survivorship and knee scores for 101 prostheses. Knee 21(4):843–847CrossRef Smith JRA, Robinson JR, Porteous AJ, Murray JRD, Hassaballa MA, Artz N, Newman JH (2014) Fixed bearing lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-Short to midterm survivorship and knee scores for 101 prostheses. Knee 21(4):843–847CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Winnock de Grave P, Barbier J, Luyckx T, Ryckaert A, Gunst P, van den Daelen L (2018) Outcomes of a fixed-bearing, medial, cemented unicondylar knee arthroplasty design: survival analysis and functional score of 460 cases. J Arthroplasty 33(9):2792–2799CrossRef Winnock de Grave P, Barbier J, Luyckx T, Ryckaert A, Gunst P, van den Daelen L (2018) Outcomes of a fixed-bearing, medial, cemented unicondylar knee arthroplasty design: survival analysis and functional score of 460 cases. J Arthroplasty 33(9):2792–2799CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Zambianchi F, Digennaro V, Giorgini A, Grandi G, Fiacchi F, Mugnai R, Catani F (2015) Surgeon’s experience influences UKA survivorship: a comparative study between all-poly and metal back designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(7):2074–2080CrossRef Zambianchi F, Digennaro V, Giorgini A, Grandi G, Fiacchi F, Mugnai R, Catani F (2015) Surgeon’s experience influences UKA survivorship: a comparative study between all-poly and metal back designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(7):2074–2080CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Zambianchi F, Franceschi G, Rivi E, Banchelli F, Marcovigi A, Khabbazè C, Catani F (2020) Clinical results and short-term survivorship of robotic-arm-assisted medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(5):1551–1559CrossRef Zambianchi F, Franceschi G, Rivi E, Banchelli F, Marcovigi A, Khabbazè C, Catani F (2020) Clinical results and short-term survivorship of robotic-arm-assisted medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(5):1551–1559CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Zuiderbaan HA, van der List JP, Khamaisy S, Nawabi DH, Thein R, Ishmael C, Paul S, Pearle AD (2017) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty: Which type of artificial joint do patients forget? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(3):681–686CrossRef Zuiderbaan HA, van der List JP, Khamaisy S, Nawabi DH, Thein R, Ishmael C, Paul S, Pearle AD (2017) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty: Which type of artificial joint do patients forget? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(3):681–686CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: high survivorship and good patient-related outcomes at a minimum five years of follow-up
Authors
Francesco Zambianchi
Valerio Daffara
Giorgio Franceschi
Federico Banchelli
Andrea Marcovigi
Fabio Catani
Publication date
01-10-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 10/2021
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06198-9

Other articles of this Issue 10/2021

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 10/2021 Go to the issue