TY - JOUR
T1 - Ten-Year Survivorship and Patient Satisfaction Following Robotic-Arm-Assisted Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty
T2 - A Prospective Multicenter Study
AU - Bayoumi, Tarik
AU - Kleeblad, Laura J.
AU - Borus, Todd A.
AU - Coon, Thomas M.
AU - Dounchis, Jon
AU - Nguyen, Joseph T.
AU - Pearle, Andrew D.
N1 - Funding Information: The study was financially supported by Stryker. The sponsor was involved in the design of the study but had no influence on the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, nor did the sponsor have a role in the drafting of the manuscript. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/6/21
Y1 - 2023/6/21
N2 - Background:Robotic-arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been shown to result in high short- and mid-term survivorship. However, it is not known whether these outcomes are maintained at long-term follow-up. This study aimed to evaluate long-term implant survivorship, modes of failure, and patient satisfaction following robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA.Methods:A prospective multicenter study of 474 consecutive patients (531 knees) undergoing robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA was conducted. A cemented, fixed-bearing system with a metal-backed onlay tibial implant was used in all cases. Patients were contacted at 10-year follow-up to determine implant survivorship and satisfaction. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier models.Results:Data were analyzed for 366 patients (411 knees) with a mean follow-up of 10.2 ± 0.4 years. A total of 29 revisions were reported, corresponding to a 10-year survivorship of 91.7% (95% confidence interval, 88.8% to 94.6%). Of all revisions, 26 UKAs were revised to total knee arthroplasty. Unexplained pain and aseptic loosening were the most commonly reported modes of failure, accounting for 38% and 35% of revisions, respectively. Of patients without revision, 91% were either satisfied or very satisfied with their overall knee function.Conclusions:This prospective multicenter study found high 10-year survivorship and patient satisfaction following robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA. Pain and fixation failure remained common causes for revision following cemented fixed-bearing medial UKA, despite the use of a robotic-arm-assisted technique. Prospective comparative studies are needed to assess the clinical value of robotic assistance over conventional techniques in UKA.Level of Evidence:Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
AB - Background:Robotic-arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been shown to result in high short- and mid-term survivorship. However, it is not known whether these outcomes are maintained at long-term follow-up. This study aimed to evaluate long-term implant survivorship, modes of failure, and patient satisfaction following robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA.Methods:A prospective multicenter study of 474 consecutive patients (531 knees) undergoing robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA was conducted. A cemented, fixed-bearing system with a metal-backed onlay tibial implant was used in all cases. Patients were contacted at 10-year follow-up to determine implant survivorship and satisfaction. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier models.Results:Data were analyzed for 366 patients (411 knees) with a mean follow-up of 10.2 ± 0.4 years. A total of 29 revisions were reported, corresponding to a 10-year survivorship of 91.7% (95% confidence interval, 88.8% to 94.6%). Of all revisions, 26 UKAs were revised to total knee arthroplasty. Unexplained pain and aseptic loosening were the most commonly reported modes of failure, accounting for 38% and 35% of revisions, respectively. Of patients without revision, 91% were either satisfied or very satisfied with their overall knee function.Conclusions:This prospective multicenter study found high 10-year survivorship and patient satisfaction following robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA. Pain and fixation failure remained common causes for revision following cemented fixed-bearing medial UKA, despite the use of a robotic-arm-assisted technique. Prospective comparative studies are needed to assess the clinical value of robotic assistance over conventional techniques in UKA.Level of Evidence:Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85163890696&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.22.01104
DO - https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.22.01104
M3 - Article
C2 - 37146125
SN - 0021-9355
VL - 105
SP - 933
EP - 942
JO - Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume
JF - Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume
IS - 12
ER -