Robotic Lateral and Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Augart, Marco Andre; Plate, Johannes F.; Bracey, Daniel N.; Jinnah, Alex; Poehling, Gary G.; Jinnah, Riyaz H.

doi:10.1053/j.oto.2015.02.002

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) can be used in the treatment of single compartment knee OA after the failure of conservative therapy 3 . UKA as a treatment for isolated compartment OA has obvious benefits over total knee arthroplasty (TKA), such as less blood loss in surgery, preservation of the unaffected side, faster recovery time, improved functional outcome and reduced perioperative morbidity 4–6 . These advantages of UKA are offset by the higher rate of complications (OA of the contralateral compartment, implant loosening and revision), which are commonly caused by component malposition and limb malalignment 5,7–10 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of robotic‐assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of single compartment knee osteoarthritis: A meta‐analysis

Zhang

et al. 2020

Robotics Computer Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The robotic‐assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is proposed to improve the accuracy of component positioning. Methods We conducted a literature search in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library until April 2020. Results Our meta‐analysis included 10 articles, involving 1231 knees. Our meta‐analysis demonstrated that the robotic group had significantly better results in outliers of limb alignment (p < 0.001) and outliers of tibial alignment (p < 0.001). No statistical differences were found in the American Knee Society Score (p = 0.63), range of motion (p = 0.93), pain (p = 0.27), rate of revisions (p = 0.73) and rate of complications (p = 0.67). Conclusions Robotic‐assisted UKA has better component position accuracy compared with conventional UKA. But there was no significant difference in clinical results. In order to further evaluate the utility of robotic‐assisted UKA, long‐term follow‐up randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed, as well as studies to evaluate the correlation between postoperative alignment and long‐term clinical results.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of robotic‐assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of single compartment knee osteoarthritis: A meta‐analysis

Zhang

et al. 2020

Robotics Computer Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Robotic Lateral and Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Cited by 1 publication

References 55 publications

Comparison of robotic‐assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of single compartment knee osteoarthritis: A meta‐analysis

Comparison of robotic‐assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of single compartment knee osteoarthritis: A meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About