Search

Objective: The different cutting mode of robot‐assisted TKAs may influence the accuracy of alignment. The purpose of this study was to compare alignment accuracy and early clinical outcomes between a CT‐based, saw cutting robotic system (MAKO) and a CT‐free, jig‐guided robotic system (ROSA) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: A total of 20 MAKO TKAs and 20 ROSA TKAs from June 2021 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Differences in the postoperative hip‐knee‐ankle (HKA) angle, lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), posterior tibial slope (PTS) and 3° outlier frequency of the HKA, LDFA, MPTA and PTS were studied at 3 months and 1 year of follow‐up. The operative time and total blood loss (TBL) were compared between these two groups. Clinical outcomes at 1 year after surgery, including range of motion (ROM), Western Ontario McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and Knee Society Score‐2011 (KSS‐2011), were also compared between these two groups. Results: The baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. There were no significant differences in the mean deviations of postoperative HKA, LDFA, MPTA or PTS between the two groups at 3 months or 1 year (all ps > 0.05). Moreover, there was no significant difference in the percentage of 3° outliers for HKA, LDFA, MPTA, or PTS between the two groups at 3‐month or 1‐year follow‐up (all ps > 0.05). The mean operation time of MAKO was longer than that of ROSA (112.7 ± 12.8 min vs 94.8 ± 23.0 min, p = 0.001), but the mean TBL (1356.7 ± 648.5 mL vs 1384.5 ± 676.3 mL) and transfusion rate (15.0% vs 5.0%) were not significantly different between the two groups (all ps > 0.05). No significant differences were found in postoperative ROM, WOMAC score or KSS score at 1 year (all ps > 0.05). Conclusion: The MAKO and ROSA had similar accuracy and precision in TKA alignment. The clinical outcomes at 1 year after surgery were also comparable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]