Does Robotic Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Restore Native Jointline More accurately than with Conventional Instruments?

Aim: The study's primary aim is the restoration of native joint line in patients having robotic-assisted unicondylar knee Arthroplasty and conventional unicondylar knee Arthroplasty. Literature in the past has demonstrated that reducing the joint line can result in greater failure rates. Methods: This is a Prospective cohort investigation of patients who had medial UKA between March 2017 and March 2022.All patient’s preoperative and postoperative radiological joint line assessments were examined by two observers by Weber's methods. Robotic-assisted UKA performed with hand-held image-free robots was compared to conventional UKA groups. Results The distal position of the femoral component was higher in Group B utilizing conventional tools than in Group A employing robotic-assisted UKA. This positional difference was statistically significant. The mean difference among the pre-operative and post-operative joint lines in Group A was 1.6 ± 0.49 (range 0.8mm to 2.4mm), while it was 2.47 ± 0.51 (range 1.6mm to 3.9mm) (p 0.005) in Group B. In Group A, a greater percentage of the subjects (64%) attained a femoral component position within two millimeters from the joint line, whereas just 18% in Group B did. Conclusion When compared with the conventional UKA technique, the meticulous attention to detail and planning for ligament rebalancing when using the Robotic-assisted UKA technique not solely enhance surgical precision for implant placing but additionally provides excellent native joint line restoration and balancing. For validation of its longevity and survivability, the cohort must be tracked for a longer period of time.