Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties: Robot vs. patient specific instrumentation

Knee

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 428-434

  Jaffry, Zahra ^a   Masjedi, Milad ^a   Clarke, Susannah ^a   Harris, Simon ^a   Karia, Monil ^a   Andrews, Barry ^a   Cobb, Justin ^a  

^a CHARING CROSS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Osteoarthritis; Surgical accuracy; Surgical technique; Three dimensional analysis; Unicompartmental knee replacement

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMORAL KNEE PROSTHESIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; KNEE IMPLANT; OPERATION DURATION; PATIENT SPECIFIC INSTRUMENTATION; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL ERROR; TIBIA; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT PLANNING; UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DEVICES; HUMAN; KNEE; KNEE PROSTHESIS; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; PROCEDURES; PROSTHESIS; RADIOGRAPHY; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; SURGERY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; THREE DIMENSIONAL PRINTING;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MODELS, ANATOMIC; OPERATIVE TIME; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; PRINTING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; PROSTHESIS FITTING; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84899585603     PISSN: 09680160     EISSN: 18735800     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2013.11.017     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Pearle A.D., Kendoff D., Musahl V. Perspectives on computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery: movement toward quantitative orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009, 91(Suppl. 1):7-12.
2. Lonner J.H. Indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and rationale for robotic arm-assisted technology. Am J Orthop 2009, 38(2 Suppl.):3-6.
3. Fisher D.A., Watts M., Davis K.E. Implant position in knee surgery: a comparison of minimally invasive, open unicompartmental, and total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2003, 18(7 Suppl. 1):2-8.
4. Hernigou P., Deschamps G. Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86-A(3):506-511.
5. Hernigou P., Deschamps G. Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004, 423:161-165.
6. Willis-Owen C.A., Brust K., Alsop H., Miraldo M., Cobb J.P. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty in the UK National Health Service: an analysis of candidacy, outcome and cost efficacy. Knee 2009, 16(6):473-478.
7. Amin A.K., Patton J.T., Cook R.E., Gaston M., Brenkel I.J. Unicompartmental or total knee arthroplasty?: Results from a matched study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006, 451:101-106.
8. Koskinen E., Eskelinen A., Paavolainen P., Pulkkinen P., Remes V. Comparison of survival and cost-effectiveness between unicondylar arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in patients with primary osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 50,493 knee replacements from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2008, 79(4):499-507.
9. Davies B.L., Rodriguez y Baena F.M., Barrett A.R.W., Gomes M.P.S.F., Harris S.J., Jakopec M., et al. Robotic control in knee joint replacement surgery. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2007, 221(1):71-80.
10. Lang J.E., Mannava S., Floyd A.J., Goddard M.S., Smith B.P., Mofidi A., et al. Robotic systems in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011, 93(10):1296-1299.
11. Cobb J., Henckel J., Gomes P., Harris S., Jakopec M., Rodriguez F., et al. Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006, 88(2):188-197.
12. Koeck F.X., Beckmann J., Luring C., Rath B., Grifka J., Basad E. Evaluation of implant position and knee alignment after patient-specific unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 2011, 18(5):294-299.
13. Fitz W. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with use of novel patient-specific resurfacing implants and personalized jigs. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009, 91(Suppl. 1):69-76.
14. Schlueter-Brust K., Bontemps G., Sobottke R., Röllinghoff M., Michael J.W.P., Siewe J., et al. The future of surgical orthopaedics of the knee. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2010, 224(6):729-734.
15. Biomet Oxford partial knee-manual of surgical technique Available at, [Accessed May 4, 2012]. http://www.biomet.nl/resource/5980/Oxford-Knee-Optec.pdf.
16. Barrett A. Plastic bone testing report-Acrobot Sculptor Version 2.0.1 2010, The Acrobot Company Limited, London.
17. Karia M., Masjedi M., Andrews B., Jaffry Z., Cobb J. Robotic assistance enables inexperinced surgeons to perform unicompartemental knee arthroplasties on dry bone models with accuracy superior to conventional methods. Adv Orthop 2013, 2013. [Article ID 481039]. 10.1155/2013/481039.
18. Masjedi M., Jaffry Z., Harris S., Cobb J. Protocol for evaluation of robotic technology in orthopedic surgery. Adv Orthop 2013, 2013. [Article ID 194683]. 10.1155/2013/194683.
19. Bargar W.L. Robots in orthopaedic surgery: past, present, and future. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007, 463:31-36.
20. Yen P.L., Davies B.L. Active constraint control for image-guided robotic surgery. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2010, 224(5):623-631.