Robotic‐assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty restored prearthritic alignment and led to superior functional outcomes compared with conventional techniques

摘要

PURPOSE: Robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) can ensure precise preoperative planning, minimise soft tissue damage and restore native coronal alignment. However, few studies have investigated how these advantages translate into differences in early postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to compare differences in early outcomes between conventional UKA (C-UKA) and robotic-assisted UKA (R-UKA). METHODS: This retrospective study investigated two groups of patients who underwent medial UKA: C-UKA group (n = 35) and R-UKA group (n = 35). We assessed (1) serum indicators (hemoglobin, creatine kinase and C-reactive protein) and pain visual analogue scale (VAS) at postoperative days (PODs) 1, 2, 4 and 6; (2) radiologic parameters including joint line height change and arithmetic and mechanical hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA and mHKA); (3) patient-reported outcomes including Knee Society Scores, Western Ontario and Mcmaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Despite similar serum indicator results, pain VAS was lower in the R-UKA group than in the C-UKA group at PODs 2 (2.5 ± 1.3 vs. 3.6 ± 1.2, p = 0.02), 4 (2.4 ± 0.9 vs. 3.3 ± 1.0, p = 0.03) and 6 (1.9 ± 1.1 vs. 3.1 ± 1.1, p < 0.01). The joint line height change was significantly lower in the R-UKA group than in the C-UKA group (0.9 mm ± 0.6 mm vs. 2.0 mm ± 1.3 mm, p = 0.02). The equivalence test for preoperative aHKA and postoperative mHKA revealed equivalence in only the R-UKA group (p < 0.01). The R-UKA group showed better WOMAC and FJS-12 compared to C-UKA group at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: R-UKA led to lower pain VAS in the early postoperative period compared with C-UKA. Additionally, R-UKA effectively restored the joint line and prearthritic lower limb alignment, resulting in superior functional outcomes at 1-year follow-up compared with C-UKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.