Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-2664-7551
Computed Tomography-Based Analysis of Implant Positioning after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Conventional and Robotic Arm-Assisted Procedures

Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the deviation from the surgical plan of femoral and tibial components positioning after robotic total knee arthroplasty (R-TKA) compared with conventional TKA (C-TKA) based on postoperative three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT). This prospective randomized trial included 60 patients: 29 in the C-TKA group and 31 in the R-TKA one. Early postoperative 3D-CT-based analysis of implants positioning was performed. Measurements were performed twice by two observers, showing good to excellent intra- and interobserver reproducibility (interclass coefficient ranging from 0.71 to 0.96). Absolute deviations from the surgical plan (mechanical alignment in the C-TKA group and personalized alignment in the R-TKA group) were compared between groups. Primary endpoint was coronal lower limb frontal alignment: hip–knee–ankle (HKA) angle. Secondary endpoints were frontal, sagittal, and rotational positioning of both tibial and femoral components. Planned frontal lower limb alignment was similarly achieved in both group: HKA angle mean difference was 2.28 ± 1.81 degrees in the C-TKA group and 1.84 ± 1.46 degrees in the R-TKA group (p = 0.379). Deviations from the surgical plan were lower in the R-TKA group compared with the C-TKA group for all parameters, except tibial rotation (9.02 ± 4.51 vs. 7.42 ± 3.96 degrees, respectively). These differences turned out to be statistically significant only for sagittal alignment of both femoral (1.71 ± 1.34 vs. 3.61 ± 2.05 degrees, p < 0.001) and tibial (3.78 ± 1.15 vs. 4.94 ± 1.99 degrees, p = 0.018) components. Accuracy in achieving planned coronal lower limb alignment is not higher using R-TKA compared with C-TKA. Regarding component positioning, R-TKA appears superior in the sagittal plane while no significant differences were identified in terms of frontal alignment and rotation.
Level of Evidence I.
Publication History
Received: 21 March 2025
Accepted: 23 July 2025
Article published online:
06 August 2025
© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
References
- 1 DeFrance MJ, Scuderi GR. Are 20% of patients actually dissatisfied following total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review of the literature. J Arthroplasty 2023; 38 (03) 594-599
- 2 Saragaglia D, Rubens-Duval B, Gaillot J, Lateur G, Pailhé R. Total knee arthroplasties from the origin to navigation: history, rationale, indications. Int Orthop 2019; 43 (03) 597-604
- 3 Barrett W, Hoeffel D, Dalury D, Mason JB, Murphy J, Himden S. In-vivo alignment comparing patient specific instrumentation with both conventional and computer assisted surgery (CAS) instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (02) 343-347
- 4 Luan Y, Wang H, Zhang M. et al. Comparison of navigation systems for total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Surg 2023; 10: 1112147
- 5 Pailhé R. Total knee arthroplasty: latest robotics implantation techniques. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2021; 107 (1S): 102780
- 6 Rivière C, Vigdorchik JM, Vendittoli PA. Mechanical alignment: the end of an era!. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2019; 105 (07) 1223-1226
- 7 Rivière C, Villet L, Jeremic D, Vendittoli PA. What you need to know about kinematic alignment for total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2021; 107 (1S): 102773
- 8 Morcos MW, Uhuebor D, Vendittoli PA. Overview of the different personalized total knee arthroplasty with robotic assistance, how choosing?. Front Surg 2023; 10: 1120908
- 9 Batailler C, Fernandez A, Swan J. et al. MAKO CT-based robotic arm-assisted system is a reliable procedure for total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021; 29 (11) 3585-3598
- 10 Kim YH, Yoon SH, Park JW. Does robotic-assisted TKA result in better outcome scores or long-term survivorship than conventional TKA? A randomized, controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2020; 478 (02) 266-275
- 11 Bollars P, Janssen D, De Weerdt W. et al. Improved accuracy of implant placement with an imageless handheld robotic system compared to conventional instrumentation in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial using CT-based assessment of radiological outcomes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31 (12) 5446-5452
- 12 Rajgor HD, Mayne A, Munasinghe C. et al. MAKO versus ROSA: comparing surgical accuracy in robotic total knee arthroplasty. J Robot Surg 2024; 18 (01) 33
- 13 Alrajeb R, Zarti M, Shuia Z, Alzobi O, Ahmed G, Elmhiregh A. Robotic-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2024; 34 (03) 1333-1343
- 14 Batailler C, Hannouche D, Benazzo F, Parratte S. Concepts and techniques of a new robotically assisted technique for total knee arthroplasty: the ROSA knee system. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2021; 141 (12) 2049-2058
- 15 Kayani B, Konan S, Huq SS, Tahmassebi J, Haddad FS. Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty has a learning curve of seven cases for integration into the surgical workflow but no learning curve effect for accuracy of implant positioning. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (04) 1132-1141
- 16 Li Z, Chen X, Wang X. et al. HURWA robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty improves component positioning and alignment - a prospective randomized and multicenter study. J Orthop Translat 2022; 33: 31-40
- 17 Yuan M, Ling T, Su Q, Wan X, Lai Y, Zhou Z. Safety and effectiveness of robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Surg 2024; 16 (04) 882-893
- 18 Jeon SW, Kim KI, Song SJ. Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty does not improve long-term clinical and radiologic outcomes. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34 (08) 1656-1661
- 19 Hirschmann MT, Konala P, Amsler F, Iranpour F, Friederich NF, Cobb JP. The position and orientation of total knee replacement components: a comparison of conventional radiographs, transverse 2D-CT slices and 3D-CT reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93 (05) 629-633
- 20 Ahrend MD, Baumgartner H, Ihle C, Histing T, Schröter S, Finger F. Influence of axial limb rotation on radiographic lower limb alignment: a systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2022; 142 (11) 3349-3366
- 21 Hasan S, van Hamersveld KT, Marang-van de Mheen PJ, Kaptein BL, Nelissen RGHH, Toksvig-Larsen S. Migration of a novel 3D-printed cementless versus a cemented total knee arthroplasty: two-year results of a randomized controlled trial using radiostereometric analysis. Bone Joint J 2020; 102-B (08) 1016-1024
- 22 Yilmaz M, Holm CE, Lind T, Flivik G, Odgaard A, Petersen MM. Bone remodeling and implant migration of uncemented femoral and cemented asymmetrical tibial components in total knee arthroplasty - DXA and RSA evaluation with 2-year follow up. Knee Surg Relat Res 2021; 33 (01) 25
- 23 Mahoney O, Kinsey T, Sodhi N. et al. Improved component placement accuracy with robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2022; 35 (03) 337-344
- 24 Akagi M, Oh M, Nonaka T, Tsujimoto H, Asano T, Hamanishi C. An anteroposterior axis of the tibia for total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (420) 213-219
- 25 Kayani B, Tahmassebi J, Ayuob A, Konan S, Oussedik S, Haddad FS. A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing the systemic inflammatory response in conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty versus robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2021; 103-B (01) 113-122
- 26 Deckey DG, Rosenow CS, Verhey JT. et al. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty improves accuracy and precision compared to conventional techniques. Bone Joint J 2021; 103-B (6, Supple A): 74-80
- 27 Ma N, Sun P, Xin P, Zhong S, Xie J, Xiao L. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of MAKO robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus conventional manual total knee arthroplasty in uncomplicated unilateral total knee arthroplasty a single-centre retrospective analysis. Int Orthop 2024; 48 (09) 2351-2358
- 28 Vaidya NV, Deshpande AN, Panjwani T, Patil R, Jaysingani T, Patil P. Robotic-assisted TKA leads to a better prosthesis alignment and a better joint line restoration as compared to conventional TKA: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (02) 621-626
- 29 Lau CTK, Chau WW, Lau LCM, Ho KKW, Ong MTY, Yung PSH. Surgical accuracy and clinical outcomes of image-free robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Int J Med Robot 2023; 19 (03) e2505
- 30 Thiengwittayaporn S, Uthaitas P, Senwiruch C, Hongku N, Tunyasuwanakul R. Imageless robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty accurately restores the radiological alignment with a short learning curve: a randomized controlled trial. Int Orthop 2021; 45 (11) 2851-2858
- 31 Liow MHL, Xia Z, Wong MK, Tay KJ, Yeo SJ, Chin PL. Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty accurately restores the joint line and mechanical axis. A prospective randomised study. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (12) 2373-2377
- 32 Song EK, Seon JK, Yim JH, Netravali NA, Bargar WL. Robotic-assisted TKA reduces postoperative alignment outliers and improves gap balance compared to conventional TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (01) 118-126
- 33 Xu J, Li L, Fu J. et al. Early clinical and radiographic outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional manual total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled study. Orthop Surg 2022; 14 (09) 1972-1980
- 34 Hampp EL, Chughtai M, Scholl LY. et al. Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrated greater accuracy and precision to plan compared with manual techniques. J Knee Surg 2019; 32 (03) 239-250
- 35 Kawaguchi K, Inui H, Taketomi S, Yamagami R, Nakazato K, Tanaka S. Intraoperative tibial anteroposterior axis could not be replicated after tibial osteotomy in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34 (10) 2371-2375
- 36 De Valk EJ, Noorduyn JCA, Mutsaerts ELAR. How to assess femoral and tibial component rotation after total knee arthroplasty with computed tomography: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (11) 3517-3528
- 37 Fu X, She Y, Jin G. et al. Comparison of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. J Robot Surg 2024; 18 (01) 292
- 38 Hoveidaei AH, Esmaeili S, Ghaseminejad-Raeini A. et al. Robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is not associated with increased patient satisfaction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Orthop 2024; 48 (07) 1771-1784
- 39 Bensa A, Sangiorgio A, Deabate L, Illuminati A, Pompa B, Filardo G. 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. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31 (11) 4680-4691
- 40 Kazarian GS, Haddad FS, Donaldson MJ, Wignadasan W, Nunley RM, Barrack RL. Implant malalignment may be a risk factor for poor patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). J Arthroplasty 2022; 37 (6S): S129-S133
- 41 Vendittoli PA, Beckers G, Massé V, de Grave PW, Ganapathi M, MacDessi SJ. Why we should use boundaries for personalised knee arthroplasty and the lack of evidence for unrestricted kinematic alignment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2024; 32 (08) 1917-1922