JoVE - Journal of Visualized Experiments
JoVE Visualize
Research Domains
View All

Contact Us

Can Robotic-Assisted Arthroplasty Change The High Early Revision Rate After Patellofemoral Arthroplasty? An Analysis From The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

  • 1Arthroplasty Fellow At the University of Manitoba, Canada.
  • 2Arthroplasty Fellow At the University of Manitoba, Canada. Electronic address: elias.saidy@gmail.com.
  • 3South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI), Adelaide, South Australia.
  • 4Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), Adelaide, South Australia.
+

|

June 13, 2025

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is considered a less invasive procedure with shorter rehabilitation when compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Its use has been limited due to higher rates of complications and increased revision rate The purpose of this study was to assess if robotic assistance reduced the risk of revision in PFA compared to when conventional techniques were used.

METHODS

Data from the Australian Orthopedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from 2015 until the end of 2022 was used to compare the cumulative percentage revision (CPR) of robotically and non-robotically assisted PFA. We also investigated reasons for revision and types of revision.

RESULTS

There were 669 robotic-assisted PFA and 1,481 non-robotic-assisted PFA. The mean follow-up was 2.9 years for the robotic-assisted PFA and 3.6 years for the non-robotic-assisted PFA. Cumulative percent revision at six years for the two groups was 12.7% for robotic-assisted and 11.6% for non-robotic assistance with no significant difference(HR [hazard ratio] = 0.81 (95% CI [confidence interval] 0.53 to 1.24); P = 0.34).

CONCLUSION

Our study did not find that robotic assistance for PFA improves early revision rates when compared to PFA without robotic assistance.

Related Concept Videos