Background: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) demonstrates excellent durability using jig-based manual techniques (manual TKA [mTKA]), but significant rates of dissatisfaction remain. Modifications of mTKA techniques and TKA implant designs to improve outcomes have had minimal success. Studies comparing relative outcomes of mTKA and robotic-assisted TKA (raTKA) are limited. Purpose: This study sought to compare outcomes of mTKA and raTKA in patients at a single institution. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all primary TKAs performed by 1 surgeon from 2015 to 2017. In all, 139 consecutive mTKAs (2015–2016) and 148 consecutive raTKAs (2016–2017) were included. No cases were excluded. Patient demographics, complications, readmission rates, and clinical and patient-reported outcomes were compared at a minimum of 1-year follow-up. A post hoc student t test and Pearson χ2 test were used for continuous and categorical data. Results: We found that mTKA patients compared with raTKA patients required significantly longer length of stay (LOS) (1.73 vs 1.18 days, respectively), greater morphine milligram equivalents consumption (89.6 vs 65.2, respectively), and increased physical therapy (PT) visits (13.0 vs 11.0, respectively) with increased 30-day readmission rates (4.3 vs 0.7%, respectively) that approached significance. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement and the University of California at Los Angeles activity score did not differ significantly comparing raTKA with mTKA patients at 1 year. There were no differences in complication rates. Conclusion: Significant early clinical benefits were noted with raTKA, including lower opioid requirements, shorter LOS, and fewer PT visits when compared with mTKA. A reduction in 30-day readmission rates was noted with raTKA that was not significant. Excellent clinical results with similar patient-reported outcomes were noted in both groups at 1-year follow-up. Further prospective investigations at longer follow-up intervals comparing these techniques are warranted.
AimsOsteoporosis can determine surgical strategy for total hip arthroplasty (THA), and perioperative fracture risk. The aims of this study were to use hip CT to measure femoral bone mineral density (BMD) using CT X-ray absorptiometry (CTXA), determine if systematic evaluation of preoperative femoral BMD with CTXA would improve identification of osteopenia and osteoporosis compared with available preoperative dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) analysis, and determine if improved recognition of low BMD would affect the use of cemented stem fixation.MethodsRetrospective chart review of a single-surgeon database identified 78 patients with CTXA performed prior to robotic-assisted THA (raTHA) (Group 1). Group 1 was age- and sex-matched to 78 raTHAs that had a preoperative hip CT but did not have CTXA analysis (Group 2). Clinical demographics, femoral fixation method, CTXA, and DXA data were recorded. Demographic data were similar for both groups.ResultsPreoperative femoral BMD was available for 100% of Group 1 patients (CTXA) and 43.6% of Group 2 patients (DXA). CTXA analysis for all Group 1 patients preoperatively identified 13 osteopenic and eight osteoporotic patients for whom there were no available preoperative DXA data. Cemented stem fixation was used with higher frequency in Group 1 versus Group 2 (28.2% vs 14.3%, respectively; p = 0.030), and in all cases where osteoporosis was diagnosed, irrespective of technique (DXA or CTXA).ConclusionPreoperative hip CT scans which are routinely obtained prior to raTHA can determine bone health, and thus guide femoral fixation strategy. Systematic preoperative evaluation with CTXA resulted in increased recognition of osteopenia and osteoporosis, and contributed to increased use of cemented femoral fixation compared with routine clinical care; in this small study, however, it did not impact short-term periprosthetic fracture risk.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):254–260.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.