Trends in Computer Navigation and Robotic Assistance for Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States: an Analysis of Patient and Hospital Factors

Overview

Journal Arthroplast Today

Publisher Elsevier

Date 2019 Apr 26

PMID 31020030

Citations 52

Authors

Joseph K Antonios

Shane Korber

Lakshmanan Sivasundaram

Cory Mayfield

Hyunwoo Paco Kang

Daniel A Oakes

Nathanael D Heckmann

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Computer navigation and robotic assistance technologies are used to improve the accuracy of component positioning in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), with the goal of improving function and optimizing implant longevity. The purpose of this study was to analyze trends in the use of technology-assisted TKA, identify factors associated with the use of these technologies, and describe potential drivers of cost.

Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was used to identify patients who underwent TKA using conventional instrumentation, computer navigation, and robot-assisted techniques between 2005 and 2014. Variables analyzed include patient demographics, hospital and payer types, and hospital charges. Descriptive statistics were used to describe trends. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify differences between conventional and technology-assisted groups.

Results: Our analysis identified 6,060,901 patients who underwent TKA from 2005 to 2014, of which 273,922 (4.5%) used computer navigation and 24,084 (0.4%) used robotic assistance. The proportion of technology-assisted TKAs steadily increased over the study period, from 1.2% in 2005 to 7.0% in 2014. Computer navigation increased in use from 1.2% in 2005 to 6.3% in 2014. Computer navigation was more likely to be used in the Western United States, whereas robot-assisted TKAs were more likely to be performed in the Northeast. Increased hospital charges were associated with the use of technology assistance ($53,740.1 vs $47,639.2).

Conclusions: The use of computer navigation and robot-assisted TKA steadily increased over the study period, accounting for 7.0% of TKAs performed in the United States in 2014. Marked regional differences in the use of these technologies were identified. The use of these technologies was associated with increased hospital charges.

Citing Articles

Accelerometer-Navigated Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Technique for Successful Gap Balancing.

Wells M, Purcell R Arthroplast Today. 2025; 30:101510.

PMID: 39959368 PMC: 11827119. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101510.

Trends in adoption of robotics in arthroplasty: an analysis of the Indian landscape.

Mulpur P, Jayakumar T, Kikkuri R, Annapareddy A, Hippalgaonkar K, Reddy A J Robot Surg. 2025; 19(1):62.

PMID: 39915360 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-025-02224-5.

Patient Perspective on Robotic-Assisted Total Joint Arthroplasty.

Dandamudi S, Jan K, Malvitz M, Debenedetti A, Behery O, Levine B Arthroplast Today. 2025; 31():101598.

PMID: 39811776 PMC: 11731747. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101598.

Access to robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty varies significantly by race/ethnicity.

Schmerler J, Bergstein V, Kagabo W, Khanuja H, Oni J, Hegde V Knee Surg Relat Res. 2025; 37(1):1.

PMID: 39762989 PMC: 11702079. DOI: 10.1186/s43019-024-00255-0.

Noise-Induced Hearing Loss: Should Surgeons Be Wearing Ear Protection During Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty?.

Kwan S, Ong A, Lutz R, Lau V, Santoro A, Deirmengian G HSS J. 2024; 15563316241254352.

PMID: 39564417 PMC: 11572446. DOI: 10.1177/15563316241254352.

References

Chauhan S, Scott R, Breidahl W, Beaver R . Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004; 86(3):372-7. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.86b3.14643. View

Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Luring C, Zurakowski D, Grifka J . Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004; 86(5):682-7. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.86b5.14927. View

Berend M, Ritter M, Meding J, Faris P, Keating E, Redelman R . Tibial component failure mechanisms in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; (428):26-34. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000148578.22729.0e. View

Decking R, Markmann Y, Fuchs J, Puhl W, Scharf H . Leg axis after computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial comparing computer-navigated and manual implantation. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(3):282-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.09.047. View

Anderson K, Buehler K, Markel D . Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: comparison with conventional methods. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(7 Suppl 3):132-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.05.009. View

Chin P, Yang K, Yeo S, Lo N . Randomized control trial comparing radiographic total knee arthroplasty implant placement using computer navigation versus conventional technique. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(5):618-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.04.004. View

Kalairajah Y, Cossey A, Verrall G, Ludbrook G, Spriggins A . Are systemic emboli reduced in computer-assisted knee surgery?: A prospective, randomised, clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88(2):198-202. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B2.16906. View

Ensini A, Catani F, Leardini A, Romagnoli M, Giannini S . Alignments and clinical results in conventional and navigated total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007; 457:156-62. DOI: 10.1097/BLO.0b013e3180316c92. View

Matziolis G, Krocker D, Weiss U, Tohtz S, Perka C . A prospective, randomized study of computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty. Three-dimensional evaluation of implant alignment and rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89(2):236-43. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00386. View

10.

Bauwens K, Matthes G, Wich M, Gebhard F, Hanson B, Ekkernkamp A . Navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89(2):261-9. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00601. View

11.

Kim Y, Kim J, Yoon S . Alignment and orientation of the components in total knee replacement with and without navigation support: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89(4):471-6. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B4.18878. View

12.

Decking R, Markmann Y, Mattes T, Puhl W, Scharf H . On the outcome of computer-assisted total knee replacement. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2007; 74(3):171-4. View

13.

Choong P, Dowsey M, Stoney J . Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? Comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008; 24(4):560-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2008.02.018. View

14.

Jeffery R, Morris R, Denham R . Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991; 73(5):709-14. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.73B5.1894655. View

15.

Ritter M, Meneghini R . Twenty-year survivorship of cementless anatomic graduated component total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2009; 25(4):507-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.04.018. View

16.

Browne J, Cook C, Hofmann A, Bolognesi M . Postoperative morbidity and mortality following total knee arthroplasty with computer navigation. Knee. 2009; 17(2):152-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2009.08.002. View

17.

Parratte S, Pagnano M, Trousdale R, Berry D . Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010; 92(12):2143-9. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.I.01398. View

18.

Hiscox C, Bohm E, Turgeon T, Hedden D, Burnell C . Randomized trial of computer-assisted knee arthroplasty: impact on clinical and radiographic outcomes. J Arthroplasty. 2011; 26(8):1259-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.02.012. View

19.

Barrett W, Mason J, Moskal J, Dalury D, Oliashirazi A, Fisher D . Comparison of radiographic alignment of imageless computer-assisted surgery vs conventional instrumentation in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011; 26(8):1273-1284.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.04.037. View

20.

Harvie P, Sloan K, Beaver R . Computer navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty: five-year functional results of a prospective randomized trial. J Arthroplasty. 2011; 27(5):667-72.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.08.009. View