Robotic‐assisted mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty does not lead to better clinical and radiological outcomes when compared to conventional TKA: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

AbstractPurposeRobotic‐assisted total knee arthroplasty (R‐TKA) has emerged as an alternative to improve the results of the conventional manual TKA (C‐TKA). The aim of this study was to analyse the high‐level studies comparing R‐TKA and C‐TKA in terms of clinical outcomes, radiological results, perioperative parameters, and complications. MethodsThe literature search was conducted on three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science) on 1 February 2023 according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA). Inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled trials (RCTs), written in English language, published in the last 15 years, focusing on the comparison of C‐TKA and R‐TKA results. The quality of each article was assessed using the Cochrane risk‐of‐bias tool for randomized trials version 2 (RoB 2). The statistical analysis was carried out using random effects (DerSimonian & Laird) for weighted mean difference (MD) of the continuous variables and Peto method for odds ratios of the dichotomous variables. ResultsAmong the 2905 articles retrieved, 14 RCTs on 12 series of patients treated with mechanically aligned implants were included. A total of 2255 patients (25.1% males and 74.9% females; mean age 62.9 ± 3.0; mean BMI 28.1 ± 1.3) were analysed. The results of this systematic review and meta‐analysis showed that R‐TKA did not provide overall superior results compared to C‐TKA in mechanically aligned implants in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes. R‐TKA showed longer operative time (MD = 15.3 min, p = 0.004) and similar complication rates compared to C‐TKA. A statistically significant difference in favour of R‐TKA was found in the posterior‐stabilized subgroup in terms of radiological outcomes (hip–knee–ankle angle MD = 1.7, p < 0.001) compared to C‐TKA, although without resulting in appreciable difference of clinical outcomes.ConclusionR‐TKA did not provide overall superior results compared to C‐TKA in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes, showing longer operative time and similar complication rates.Level of evidenceLevel I.