Robot-assisted surgery and knee arthroplasty in genu valgum: impact of the surgical approach.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research Pub Date : 2025-03-12 DOI:10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104226
Emeline Chapron, Rémy Coulomb, Aymeric Weiss, Philippe Marchand, Pascal Kouyoumdjian
{"title":"Robot-assisted surgery and knee arthroplasty in genu valgum: impact of the surgical approach.","authors":"Emeline Chapron, Rémy Coulomb, Aymeric Weiss, Philippe Marchand, Pascal Kouyoumdjian","doi":"10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The placement of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in cases of valgus can be performed through an anteromedial or anterolateral approach. The hypothesis of this study was that the anterolateral approach during robotic TKA reduced residual medial laxity of the knee. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the surgical approach on ligament balancing in robotic TKA for valgus knees ≤192 °, as evidenced by the residual laxity after final implant placement. The secondary objectives were to compare post-operative radiological parameters, the need for tibial tuberosity osteotomy, and complications between the two approaches.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a single-center, multi-operator, comparative study based on a historical-prospective cohort. A total of 81 consecutive patients who underwent Mako® Stryker robotic TKA for valgus knee ≤192 ° were included. Two groups were formed based on the surgical approach: anteromedial (AM) or anterolateral (AL). To homogenize the groups, a 1:1 propensity score matching was performed based on age, gender, and deformity. Residual laxity, evaluated in millimeters, was measured at the end of the procedure with the definitive implants, using the Mako Total Knee SmartRobotics™ software measurements in four stress positions: extension (0-10 °) varus and valgus, then flexion (85-95 °) varus and valgus. Postoperatively, a radiological analysis of the coronal alignment of the TKA, patellar tilt and translation was performed, along with an analysis of complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After matching, 37 patients were included in each AL and AM group. The groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, coronal deformity, and ASA score; however, BMI was statistically higher in the AL group (29.0 versus 26.6; p = 0.002). Residual laxity in extension was not statistically different between AL versus AM groups, respectively in medial 1.6 mm versus 2.1 mm (p = 0.326) and in lateral 1.6 mm versus 1.6 mm (p = 0.384). Laxity asymmetry in extension was lower in the AL group versus AM group (0.05 mm versus 0.5 mm; p = 0.031). In flexion, there was no significant difference regarding residual laxity in medial (AL 1.5 mm versus AM 2.4 mm; p = 0.07) and in lateral (AL 2.9 mm versus AM 2.9 mm; p = 0.344). Laxity asymmetry in flexion was greater for the AL approach than for the AM approach (-1.4 mm versus -0.5 mm; p = 0.02). There was no difference regarding postoperative coronal alignment of the implants. Patellar tilt was greater with AM (1.7 ° versus -3.8 °; + in lateral tilt; p < 0.001). Patellar translation was not different between groups. At follow-up, there were 6 complications in the AM group and 4 in the AL group (p = 0.237). Anterior tibial tuberosity osteotomy was performed in 6 versus 1 case respectively for AL and AM (p = 0.107).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In comparing residual laxity in robotic TKA for valgus knees ≤ 192 °, the main finding was that the surgical approach does not significantly impact knee residual laxity. Despite small differences, the anterolateral approach yields a knee laxity profile close to the native knee, with better management of patellar tilt, without increasing the complication rate. Moreover, the Mako workflow does not dictate the choice of surgical approach, remaining equally feasible for both AM and AL approaches.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":54664,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","volume":" ","pages":"104226"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104226","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The placement of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in cases of valgus can be performed through an anteromedial or anterolateral approach. The hypothesis of this study was that the anterolateral approach during robotic TKA reduced residual medial laxity of the knee. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the surgical approach on ligament balancing in robotic TKA for valgus knees ≤192 °, as evidenced by the residual laxity after final implant placement. The secondary objectives were to compare post-operative radiological parameters, the need for tibial tuberosity osteotomy, and complications between the two approaches.

Materials and methods: This was a single-center, multi-operator, comparative study based on a historical-prospective cohort. A total of 81 consecutive patients who underwent Mako® Stryker robotic TKA for valgus knee ≤192 ° were included. Two groups were formed based on the surgical approach: anteromedial (AM) or anterolateral (AL). To homogenize the groups, a 1:1 propensity score matching was performed based on age, gender, and deformity. Residual laxity, evaluated in millimeters, was measured at the end of the procedure with the definitive implants, using the Mako Total Knee SmartRobotics™ software measurements in four stress positions: extension (0-10 °) varus and valgus, then flexion (85-95 °) varus and valgus. Postoperatively, a radiological analysis of the coronal alignment of the TKA, patellar tilt and translation was performed, along with an analysis of complications.

Results: After matching, 37 patients were included in each AL and AM group. The groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, coronal deformity, and ASA score; however, BMI was statistically higher in the AL group (29.0 versus 26.6; p = 0.002). Residual laxity in extension was not statistically different between AL versus AM groups, respectively in medial 1.6 mm versus 2.1 mm (p = 0.326) and in lateral 1.6 mm versus 1.6 mm (p = 0.384). Laxity asymmetry in extension was lower in the AL group versus AM group (0.05 mm versus 0.5 mm; p = 0.031). In flexion, there was no significant difference regarding residual laxity in medial (AL 1.5 mm versus AM 2.4 mm; p = 0.07) and in lateral (AL 2.9 mm versus AM 2.9 mm; p = 0.344). Laxity asymmetry in flexion was greater for the AL approach than for the AM approach (-1.4 mm versus -0.5 mm; p = 0.02). There was no difference regarding postoperative coronal alignment of the implants. Patellar tilt was greater with AM (1.7 ° versus -3.8 °; + in lateral tilt; p < 0.001). Patellar translation was not different between groups. At follow-up, there were 6 complications in the AM group and 4 in the AL group (p = 0.237). Anterior tibial tuberosity osteotomy was performed in 6 versus 1 case respectively for AL and AM (p = 0.107).

Conclusion: In comparing residual laxity in robotic TKA for valgus knees ≤ 192 °, the main finding was that the surgical approach does not significantly impact knee residual laxity. Despite small differences, the anterolateral approach yields a knee laxity profile close to the native knee, with better management of patellar tilt, without increasing the complication rate. Moreover, the Mako workflow does not dictate the choice of surgical approach, remaining equally feasible for both AM and AL approaches.

Level of evidence: IV.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
26.10%
发文量
329
审稿时长
12.5 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (OTSR) publishes original scientific work in English related to all domains of orthopaedics. Original articles, Reviews, Technical notes and Concise follow-up of a former OTSR study are published in English in electronic form only and indexed in the main international databases.
期刊最新文献
Anatomical landmarks allow for accurate tibial component positioning in kinematically aligned mobile bearing medial unicompartimental knee arthroplasty. Return to driving after carpal tunnel syndrome surgery. Predictive artificial intelligence could positively influence orthopedic practices and be more widely integrated by applying it with greater transparency and regulation from learned societies. Robot-assisted surgery and knee arthroplasty in genu valgum: impact of the surgical approach. Do socio-professional categories influence the time to return to work after a primary hip replacement? Insights from a prospective study at a French center.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1