A comparative study between two commonly used robotic systems on the accuracy of the intraoperative cuts in total knee arthroplasty.

Q1 Medicine
S S Liong, W C Lee, S K M Khoo, B R K Chee, R Kunnasegaran
{"title":"A comparative study between two commonly used robotic systems on the accuracy of the intraoperative cuts in total knee arthroplasty.","authors":"S S Liong, W C Lee, S K M Khoo, B R K Chee, R Kunnasegaran","doi":"10.1007/s12306-026-00950-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) intraoperative cuts between Computed Tomography image-based MAKO and imageless ROSA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analysed registry data for patients who underwent imaged-based MAKO and imageless ROSA robotic TKA. Two reviewers independently radiographically measured the coronal alignment of the implants in relation to the mechanical axis at 3 months post-operation. These were compared to the planned intraoperative robotic cuts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred sixty-one patients underwent MAKO and 110 ROSA TKA. Intraclass correlation for radiographic readings was 0.88 to 0.96. When comparing the variability between intraoperative planned alignment and 3 months postoperative, MAKO femur showed no statistically significant difference (- 0.1° ± 0.8° vs. - 0.1° ± 1.2°, p = 0.12) and likewise no difference for tibia (- 0.9° ± 1.2° vs. - 0.6° ± 1.3°, p = 0.60). However, for ROSA, its femur showed statistically significant difference (- 1.2° ± 1.0° vs. - 0.7° ± 1.3°, p < 0.01), likewise for tibia (- 0.4° ± 0.9° vs. - 0.2° ± 1.4°, p < 0.01). The variability from intraoperation to 3 months postoperative was significantly different between MAKO and ROSA for femur (0.0° ± 1.0° vs. 0.4° ± 1.1°, p < 0.01), but was not statistically significant for tibia (0.3° ± 0.1° and 0.1° ± 1.1°, p = 0.26). There was a significant difference with a larger proportion of femur implant that deviated < 1º from intraoperative plan in MAKO compared to ROSA (62.1% and 37.2% respectively, p < 0.01). At the tibia component, there was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of the extent of deviation (p = 0.73).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was statistically significant variability in coronal alignment between intraoperative plan and postoperative 3 months in the imageless robotic system at both femur and tibia components. The extent of variability between the imageless and CT-image based systems in femur was also statistically significant. There was also a larger proportion of implant deviation of > 1º in the femur component in imageless robotic system. Nevertheless, the overall extent of the deviation between the intraoperative plan and the postoperative position was < 0.5º. Future studies may be performed to determine whether this would translate into any clinical significance.</p>","PeriodicalId":18875,"journal":{"name":"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-026-00950-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) intraoperative cuts between Computed Tomography image-based MAKO and imageless ROSA.

Methods: We retrospectively analysed registry data for patients who underwent imaged-based MAKO and imageless ROSA robotic TKA. Two reviewers independently radiographically measured the coronal alignment of the implants in relation to the mechanical axis at 3 months post-operation. These were compared to the planned intraoperative robotic cuts.

Results: One hundred sixty-one patients underwent MAKO and 110 ROSA TKA. Intraclass correlation for radiographic readings was 0.88 to 0.96. When comparing the variability between intraoperative planned alignment and 3 months postoperative, MAKO femur showed no statistically significant difference (- 0.1° ± 0.8° vs. - 0.1° ± 1.2°, p = 0.12) and likewise no difference for tibia (- 0.9° ± 1.2° vs. - 0.6° ± 1.3°, p = 0.60). However, for ROSA, its femur showed statistically significant difference (- 1.2° ± 1.0° vs. - 0.7° ± 1.3°, p < 0.01), likewise for tibia (- 0.4° ± 0.9° vs. - 0.2° ± 1.4°, p < 0.01). The variability from intraoperation to 3 months postoperative was significantly different between MAKO and ROSA for femur (0.0° ± 1.0° vs. 0.4° ± 1.1°, p < 0.01), but was not statistically significant for tibia (0.3° ± 0.1° and 0.1° ± 1.1°, p = 0.26). There was a significant difference with a larger proportion of femur implant that deviated < 1º from intraoperative plan in MAKO compared to ROSA (62.1% and 37.2% respectively, p < 0.01). At the tibia component, there was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of the extent of deviation (p = 0.73).

Conclusion: There was statistically significant variability in coronal alignment between intraoperative plan and postoperative 3 months in the imageless robotic system at both femur and tibia components. The extent of variability between the imageless and CT-image based systems in femur was also statistically significant. There was also a larger proportion of implant deviation of > 1º in the femur component in imageless robotic system. Nevertheless, the overall extent of the deviation between the intraoperative plan and the postoperative position was < 0.5º. Future studies may be performed to determine whether this would translate into any clinical significance.

两种常用机器人系统对全膝关节置换术中切口准确性的比较研究。
目的:我们旨在比较基于计算机断层成像的MAKO和无图像的ROSA在机器人全膝关节置换术(TKA)术中切割的准确性。方法:我们回顾性分析了接受基于图像的MAKO和无图像的ROSA机器人TKA的患者的注册数据。两名评论者在术后3个月独立地用放射学测量了植入物相对于机械轴的冠状排列。将这些与计划中的术中机器人切割进行比较。结果:161例患者行MAKO手术,110例行ROSA TKA手术。放射学读数的类内相关性为0.88 ~ 0.96。当比较术中计划对齐与术后3个月的变异性时,MAKO股骨无统计学差异(- 0.1°±0.8°vs - 0.1°±1.2°,p = 0.12),胫骨也无统计学差异(- 0.9°±1.2°vs - 0.6°±1.3°,p = 0.60)。然而,对于ROSA,其股骨有统计学意义差异(- 1.2°±1.0°vs - 0.7°±1.3°),p结论:术中方案与术后3个月无成像机器人系统在股骨和胫骨部位的冠状位对齐有统计学意义差异。股骨无图像和基于ct图像的系统之间的差异程度也具有统计学意义。在无成像机器人系统中,股骨组件的植入物偏差> 1º的比例也较大。然而,术中计划与术后位置之间的总体偏差程度为
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Surgery – Formerly La Chirurgia degli Organi di Movimento, founded in 1917 at the Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, is a peer-reviewed journal published three times a year. The journal provides up-to-date information to clinicians and scientists through the publication of original papers, reviews, case reports, and brief communications dealing with the pathogenesis and treatment of orthopaedic conditions.An electronic version is also available at http://www.springerlink.com.The journal is open for publication of supplements and for publishing abstracts of scientific meetings; conditions can be obtained from the Editors-in-Chief or the Publisher.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书