Robotic-Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Component Positioning and Early Outcomes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22327456Keywords:
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, Robotic-assisted surgery, Component positioning, Learning curve, Patient-reported outcomesAbstract
Background: Robotic-assisted platforms have been increasingly adopted for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to
improve component positioning precision beyond conventional jig-based instrumentation. Objective: To synthesise evidence comparing robotic-assisted and manual UKA on positioning accuracy, soft-tissue balancing, operative time, learning curve, complications, and early functional outcomes.Methods: Narrative review of randomised trials, comparative cohorts, registry analyses, and meta-analyses of robotic-assisted UKA. Findings: Robotic assistance reduces coronal, sagittal, and rotational positioning outliers and lowers early revision and complication rates, at the cost of modestly longer operative time and a learning curve of six to eleven cases. Two-year Oxford Knee Score, American Knee Society Score, and Forgotten Joint Score outcomes are comparable to manual UKA, with early functional advantages. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted UKA improves surgical precision and reduces malposition-related revision without compromising early outcomes, though cost-effectiveness depends on case volume.
References
Bell, S.W., Anthony, I., Jones, B., MacLean, A., Rowe, P., Blyth, M. (2016) Improved accuracy of component positioning with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: data from a prospective, randomized controlled study. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American Volume, 98(8): 627-635.
Rauck, R.C., Blevins, J.L., Cross, M.B. (2018) Component placement accuracy in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is improved with robotic-assisted surgery: will it have an effect on outcomes? HSS Journal, 14(2): 211-213.
Thilak, J., Thadi, M., Mane, P.P., Sharma, A., Mohan, V., Babu, B.C. (2020) Accuracy of tibial component positioning in the robotic arm assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Journal of Orthopaedics, 22: 367-371.
Park, K.K., Han, C.D., Yang, I.H., Lee, W.S., Han, J.H., Kwon, H.M. (2019) Robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty can reduce radiologic outliers compared to conventional techniques. PLOS ONE, 14(12): e0225941.
Matassi, F., Innocenti, M., Giabbani, N., Sani, G., Cozzi Lepri, A., Piolanti, N., Civinini, R. (2022) Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty reduces components' positioning differences among high- and low-volume surgeons. Journal of Knee Surgery, 35(14): 1549-1555.
Savov, P., Tuecking, L.R., Windhagen, H., Calliess, T., Ettinger, M. (2021) Robotics improves alignment accuracy and reduces early revision rates for UKA in the hands of low-volume UKA surgeons. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 141(12): 2139-2146.
Gilmour, A., MacLean, A.D., Rowe, P.J., Banger, M.S., Donnelly, I., Jones, B.G., Blyth, M.J.G. (2018) Robotic-arm-assisted vs conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the 2-year clinical outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Arthroplasty, 33(7 Suppl): S109-S115.
Kayani, B., Konan, S., Pietrzak, J.R.T., Huq, S.S., Tahmassebi, J., Haddad, F.S. (2018) The learning curve associated with robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study. Bone & Joint Journal, 100-B(8): 1033-1042.
Banger, M., Doonan, J., Rowe, P., Jones, B., MacLean, A., Blyth, M.J.B. (2021) Robotic arm-assisted versus conventional medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: five-year clinical outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. Bone & Joint Journal, 103-B(6): 1088-1095.
Sun, C., Zhao, X., Ma, Q., Zhang, X., Lou, J., Cai, X. (2026) Comparison of MAKO robotic-assisted and manual unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of radiographic precision and short-term functional results. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 20: 307.
Batailler, C., White, N., Ranaldi, F.M., Neyret, P., Servien, E., Lustig, S. (2019) Improved implant position and lower revision rate with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 27(4): 1232-1240.
Tay, M.L., Carter, M., Bolam, S.M., Zeng, N., Young, S.W. (2022) Robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty system has a learning curve of 11 cases and increased operating time. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 31(3): 793-802.
Kunze, K.N., Farivar, D., Premkumar, A., et al. (2021) Comparing clinical and radiographic outcomes of robotic-assisted, computer-navigated and conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Orthopaedics, 25: 212-219.
Shearman, A.D., Sephton, B.M., Wilson, J., Nathwani, D.K. (2021) Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is associated with earlier discharge from physiotherapy and reduced length-of-stay compared to conventional navigated techniques. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 141(12): 2147-2153.
Mergenthaler, G., Batailler, C., Lording, T., Servien, E., Lustig, S. (2021) Is robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty a safe procedure? A case control study. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 29(3): 931-938.
Crizer, M.P., Haffar, A., Battenberg, A., McGrath, M., Sutton, R., Lonner, J.H. (2021) Robotic assistance in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty results in superior early functional recovery and is more likely to meet patient expectations. Advances in Orthopedics, 2021: 4770960.
Moon, E., Gaston, P., Patton, J.T., Bell, A., Simpson, P.M., MacPherson, G.J., Hamilton, D.F. (2023) Early muscle recovery following robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. BMC Research Notes, 16: 86.
Battenberg, A.K., Netravali, N.A., Lonner, J.H. (2020) A novel handheld robotic-assisted system for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: surgical technique and early survivorship. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 14(1): 55-60.
Gaudiani, M.A., Samuel, L.T., Diana, J.N., DeBattista, J.L., Coon, T.M., Moore, R.E., Kamath, A.F. (2023) Robotic-arm assisted lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: 5-year outcomes and survivorship. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery, 31(1).
Zhang, J., Ng, N., Scott, C.E.H., et al. (2022) Robotic arm-assisted versus manual unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the MAKO robotic system. Bone & Joint Journal, 104-B(5): 541-548.
Zhang, Y., Xie, D., Huang, J., et al. (2025) Mid- to long-term complications and revision rates of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Surgery, 12: 1619644.
Xiang, P., Jin, H., Dai, Y., Yang, Y., Jia, C., Sagar, L., Zhang, J., Wu, Y., Zhang, C., Yang, S., Deng, Z. (2026) Comparative analysis of revision causes between robotic-assisted and conventional manual unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surgery & Related Research, 38(1): 10.
Motesharei, A., Rowe, P., Blyth, M., Jones, B., Maclean, A. (2018) A comparison of gait one year post operation in an RCT of robotic UKA versus traditional Oxford UKA. Gait & Posture, 62: 41-45.
Bensa, A., Sangiorgio, A., Deabate, L., Illuminati, A., Pompa, B., Filardo, G. (2024) Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty improves functional outcomes, complications, and revisions. Bone & Joint Open, 5(5): 374-384.
Moschetti, W.E., Konopka, J.F., Rubash, H.E., Genuario, J.W. (2016) Can robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty be cost-effective? A Markov decision analysis. Journal of Arthroplasty, 31(4): 759-765.
Ragab, K.M. (2023) Robotic versus conventional unicompartmental knee surgery: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Cureus, 15(10): e46681.
