Robot-assisted (RA) versus conventional total knee replacement: a 2-year clinical comparison

Abstract

Background: Robotic-assisted (RA) technology is becoming increasingly popular in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) due to its improved alignment, accuracy, and precision compared with the conventional TKA. Despite reported benefits, disagreements exist regarding patient-reported outcomes and complication rates comparing RA TKA and conventional TKA. Thus, the purpose of the study is to report differences in patient outcomes and complication rates between patients who underwent RA versus conventional TKA. Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed 239 primary knee arthroplasty cases (n=137 robot-assisted and n=102 conventional TKA) performed by a single fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeon from January 1, 2016 to February 26, 2019. The electronic medical record and patient outcomes database were reviewed for demographic characteristics (age, sex, body mass index, and comorbidities), patient-reported outcomes (Short Form Health Survey and Oxford Knee Score), 90-day complications, and revision rates. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in patient-reported outcomes between conventional versus RA groups at two time points: preoperative and 2-year. Differences remained insignificant after controlling for age, sex, body mass index, and comorbidities. There was no statistically significant difference between the conventional and RA groups in revision rates (0.7% and 1%, respectively; P=1.00) or complication rates (1.5% and 3.9%, respectively; P=0.406). Conclusions: There were no differences in 90-day complications, revisions, and patient-reported outcome scores between RA TKA and conventional TKA groups at short-term follow-up. Surgeons can expect similar clinical outcomes without an increase in complications while taking advantage of increased accuracy in alignment and component placement. Further long-term study of RA TKA outcomes is warranted. Level of Evidence: Level III.