Abstract
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to compare total and rate of caloric energy expenditure between conventional and robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between a high volume “veteran” surgeon (HV) and a lower volume, less experienced surgeon (LV).
Methods
Two specialized arthroplasty surgeons wore a biometric-enabled shirt and energy expenditure outcomes were measured (total caloric expenditure, kilocalories per minute, heart rate variability, and surgical duration) during 35 conventional (CTKA) and 29 robotic primary total knee arthroplasty (RTKA) procedures.
Results
Overall, the rate of caloric expenditure was similar between RTKA (5.60 ±2.50 kcal/min) and CTKA (4.79cal/min ±1.79, p=0.25). With 6.15 minute longer operative times, the total energy expenditure (TEE) for RTKA (239.31±96.79 kcal) was higher thanCTKA(181.54 ±80.90 kcal, p<0.001). The HV surgeon's TEE (p<0.001) and rate of energy expenditure (REE) (p<0.001) were significantly higher in RTKA (261.53cal; 6.499cal/min) versus CTKA (71.00cal; 3.759cal/min). However, the LV surgeon's TEE and REE for RTKA (207.83cal; 4.32cal/min) and CTKA (195.81cal; 4.92cal/min) were not significantly different (p>0.05). Both surgeons (HV; LV) had significantly longer surgical durations (p<0.001) in RTKA (40.41 ±4.94min; 48.91 ±8.45min) compared to CTKA surgeries (18.75±4.27min; 40.4 ±8.34min), respectively.
Conclusion
While REE did not varybetween CTKA and RTKA for the LV surgeon, it did vary significantly for the HV surgeon. Additionally, RTKA took longer and increased TEE, but one less operating room assistant was needed. Surgeons with less experience in TKA may be less likely to notice a difference in energy expenditure when utilizing robotic-arm assisted technology. It is possible that more experience with using the robotic arm could create efficiencies over time that may also reduce TEE.
