A Novel Handheld Robotic-assisted System for Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Surgical Technique and Early Survivorship

Overview

Journal J Robot Surg

Publisher Springer

Specialties Biotechnology
General Surgery

Date 2019 Feb 15

PMID 30762173

Citations 22

Authors

Andrew K Battenberg

Nathan A Netravali

Jess H Lonner

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Technology, including robotics, has been developed for use in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to improve accuracy and precision of bone preparation, implant positioning, and soft tissue balance. The NAVIO™ System (Smith and Nephew, Pittsburgh, PA, United States) is a handheld robotic system that assists surgeons in planning implant positioning based on an individual patient's anatomy and then preparing the bone surface to accurately achieve the plan. The surgical technique is presented herein. In addition, initial results are presented for 128 patients (mean age 64.7 years; 57.8% male) undergoing UKA with NAVIO. After a mean of follow-up period of 2.3 years, overall survivorship of the knee implant was 99.2% (95% confidence interval 94.6-99.9%). There was one revision encountered during the study, which was due to persistent soft tissue pain, without evidence of loosening, subsidence, malposition or infection. These initial results suggest a greater survivorship than achieved in the same follow-up time intervals in national registries and cohort studies, though further follow-up is needed to confirm whether this difference is maintained at longer durations.

Citing Articles

Orthopedic surgical robotic systems in knee arthroplasty: a comprehensive review.

Fan X, Wang Y, Zhang S, Xing Y, Li J, Ma X Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2025; 13:1523631.

PMID: 40051834 PMC: 11882601. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2025.1523631.

Robotic total knee arthroplasty safely reduces length of stay in an Asian public healthcare system.

Chan K, Cheung A, Chan P, Luk M, Chiu K, Fu H Bone Jt Open. 2025; 6(1):12-20.

PMID: 39746375 PMC: 11695079. DOI: 10.1302/2633-1462.61.BJO-2024-0184.R1.

A newly custom coordinate system used for preoperative planning of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty.

Qiao H, Xia R, Chang Y, Kong K, Jin M, Zhai Z Heliyon. 2024; 10(22):e40355.

PMID: 39619583 PMC: 11605408. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40355.

Reducing edge loading and alignment outliers with image-free robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a case controlled study.

Lau W, Liu W, Chiu K, Cheung M, Cheung A, Chan P Arthroplasty. 2024; 6(1):33.

PMID: 38835099 PMC: 11151636. DOI: 10.1186/s42836-024-00259-x.

Accuracy of Femoral Component External Rotation with all Burr Robotic Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Laddha M, Gowtam S, Jain P Malays Orthop J. 2024; 18(1):19-25.

PMID: 38638660 PMC: 11023343. DOI: 10.5704/MOJ.2403.003.

References

Ponzio D, Lonner J . Preoperative Mapping in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Using Computed Tomography Scans Is Associated with Radiation Exposure and Carries High Cost. J Arthroplasty. 2015; 30(6):964-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.10.039. View

Hamilton W, Ammeen D, Hopper Jr R . Mid-term survivorship of minimally invasive unicompartmental arthroplasty with a fixed-bearing implant: revision rate and mechanisms of failure. J Arthroplasty. 2013; 29(5):989-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.10.010. View

Chatellard R, Sauleau V, Colmar M, Robert H, Raynaud G, Brilhault J . Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: does tibial component position influence clinical outcomes and arthroplasty survival?. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013; 99(4 Suppl):S219-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2013.03.004. View

Collier M, Eickmann T, Sukezaki F, McAuley J, Engh G . Patient, implant, and alignment factors associated with revision of medial compartment unicondylar arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2006; 21(6 Suppl 2):108-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.04.012. View

Vorlat P, Putzeys G, Cottenie D, Van Isacker T, Pouliart N, Handelberg F . The Oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis: an independent 10-year survival analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2005; 14(1):40-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-005-0621-1. View

Lonner J, Moretti V . The Evolution of Image-Free Robotic Assistance in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2016; 45(4):249-54. View

Dyrhovden G, Lygre S, Badawy M, Gothesen O, Furnes O . Have the Causes of Revision for Total and Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties Changed During the Past Two Decades?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475(7):1874-1886. PMC: 5449334. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-017-5316-7. View

Lonner J, Fillingham Y . Pros and Cons: A Balanced View of Robotics in Knee Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018; 33(7):2007-2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.03.056. View

Pandit H, Jenkins C, Gill H, Barker K, Dodd C, Murray D . Minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement: results of 1000 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011; 93(2):198-204. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B2.25767. View

10.

Cobb J, Henckel J, Gomes P, Harris S, Jakopec M, Rodriguez F . Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88(2):188-97. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B2.17220. View

11.

Conditt M, Bargar W, Cobb J, Dorr L, Lonner J . Current concepts in robotics for the treatment of joint disease. Adv Orthop. 2014; 2013:948360. PMC: 3884963. DOI: 10.1155/2013/948360. View

12.

Keene G, Simpson D, Kalairajah Y . Limb alignment in computer-assisted minimally-invasive unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 88(1):44-8. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B1.16266. View

13.

Lonner J . Robotically Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with a Handheld Image-Free Sculpting Tool. Orthop Clin North Am. 2015; 47(1):29-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2015.08.024. View

14.

Robertsson O, Borgquist L, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L . Use of unicompartmental instead of tricompartmental prostheses for unicompartmental arthrosis in the knee is a cost-effective alternative. 15,437 primary tricompartmental prostheses were compared with 10,624 primary medial or lateral.... Acta Orthop Scand. 1999; 70(2):170-5. DOI: 10.3109/17453679909011257. View

15.

Lim H, Bae J, Song S, Kim S . Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement in Korean patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012; 94(8):1071-6. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B8.29372. View

16.

Liebs T, Herzberg W . Better quality of life after medial versus lateral unicondylar knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471(8):2629-40. PMC: 3705060. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-2966-y. View

17.

Herry Y, Batailler C, Lording T, Servien E, Neyret P, Lustig S . Improved joint-line restitution in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using a robotic-assisted surgical technique. Int Orthop. 2017; 41(11):2265-2271. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-017-3633-9. View

18.

Yoshida K, Tada M, Yoshida H, Takei S, Fukuoka S, Nakamura H . Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japan--clinical results in greater than one thousand cases over ten years. J Arthroplasty. 2013; 28(9 Suppl):168-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.08.019. View

19.

Decking J, Theis C, Achenbach T, Roth E, Nafe B, Eckardt A . Robotic total knee arthroplasty: the accuracy of CT-based component placement. Acta Orthop Scand. 2004; 75(5):573-9. DOI: 10.1080/00016470410001448. View

20.

Dunbar N, Roche M, Park B, Branch S, Conditt M, Banks S . Accuracy of dynamic tactile-guided unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011; 27(5):803-8.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.09.021. View