header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

THE ACCURACY OF A ROBOTICALLY-CONTROLLED FREEHAND SCULPTING TOOL FOR UNICONDYLAR KNEE ARTHROPLASTY

Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery (CAOS) 13th Annual Meeting of CAOS International



Abstract

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a treatment for osteoarthritis when the disease only affects one compartment of the knee joint. The popularity in UKA grew in the 1980s but due to high revision rates the usage decreased. A high incidence of implant malalignment has been reported when using manual instrumentation. Recent developments include surgical robotics systems with navigation which have the potential to improve the accuracy and precision of UKA.

UKA was carried out using an imageless navigation system – the Navio Precision Freehand Sculpting system (Blue Belt Technologies, Pittsburgh, USA) with a medical Uni Knee Tornier implant (Tornier, Montbonnot Saint Martin, France) on nine fresh frozen cadaveric lower limbs (8 males, 1 females, mean age 71.7 (SD 13.3)). Two users (consultant orthopaedic surgeon and post doctoral research associate) who had been trained on the system prior to the cadaveric study carried out 4 and 5 implants respectively. The aim of this study was to quantify the differences between the planned and achieved cuts.

A 3D image of the ‘actual’ implant position was overlaid on the planned implant image. The errors between the ‘actual’ and the planned implant placement were calculated in three planes and the three rotations. The maximum femoral implant rotational error was 3.7° with a maximum RMS angular error of 2°. The maximum femoral implant translational error was 2.6mm and the RMS translational error across all directions was up to 1.1mm. The maximum tibial implant rotational error was 4.1° with a maximum RMS angular error was 2.6°. The maximum translational error was 2.7mm and the RMS translational error across all directions was up to 2.0mm.

The results were comparable to those reported by other robotic assistive devices on the market for UKA. This technology still needs clinical assessment to confirm these promising results.


Email: