Manual Versus Robotic-Assisted Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty For Instability

Description

This episode of AI Talks with Bone & Joint discusses the August 2026 paper 'Manual versus robotic-assisted revision total knee arthroplasty for instability' by A. Burbelo and colleagues. Brian and Lisa review a study of 133 revision knee arthroplasty patients comparing conventional manual surgery with robotic-assisted surgery using the MAKO system. The conversation focuses on whether robotic assistance improves early postoperative outcomes and component alignment in complex revision total knee arthroplasty cases involving instability and bone loss. Key outcomes included operating time, hospital stay, joint line changes, posterior condylar offset, function scores, and complication rates. The robotic group showed a greater increase in posterior condylar offset than the manual group, but also had a slightly longer operating time due to setup and registration. Despite this, hospital stay, functional outcomes, and complication rates were similar between groups. The hosts also note the study population’s average age of about 66 years, near-equal sex distribution, and generally high ASA grades. The discussion highlights the promise of robotic-assisted revision TKA for greater precision and more accurate restoration of knee alignment, while emphasizing that larger prospective studies are needed to confirm long-term benefits such as functional improvement and implant survivorship.

Specialties

Paper Links

https://boneandjoint.org.uk/Article/10.1302/2633-1462.78.BJO-2026-0018.R1