Comparison of Robotic-Assisted and Conventional Manual Implantation of a Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

Abstract

This study was aimed to compare robotic-assisted implantation of a total knee arthroplasty with conventional manual implantation. We controlled, randomized, and reviewed 72 patients for total knee arthroplasty assigned to undergo either conventional manual implantation (excluding navigation-assisted implantation cases) of a Zimmer LPS prosthesis (Zimmer, Warsaw, Ind) (30 patients: group 1) or robotic-assisted implantation of such a prosthesis (32 patients: group 2). The femoral flexion angle ( γ angle) and tibial angle ( δ angle) in the lateral x-ray of group 1 were 4.19 ± 3.28° and 89.7 ± 1.7°, and those of group 2 were 0.17 ± 0.65° and 85.5 ± 0.92°. The major complications were from improper small skin incision during a constraint attempt of minimally invasive surgery and during bulk fixation frame pins insertion. Robotic-assisted technology had definite advantages in terms of preoperative planning, accuracy of the intraoperative procedure, and postoperative follow-up, especially in the femoral flexion angle ( γ angle) and tibial flexion angle ( δ angle) in the lateral x-ray, and in the femoral flexion angle ( α angle) in the anteroposterior x-ray. But a disadvantage was the high complication rate in early stage.