Introduction

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) has been introduced to enhance surgical precision, alignment, and soft-tissue balancing, thus enabling the advent of numerous alignment philosophies including functional alignment (FA). This study aimed to compare early clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and radiographic accuracy brought about by RATKA using FA principles against the current reference standard of conventional total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and mechanical alignment (MA).

Methods

This prospective, non-randomized cohort study included 45 patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA (30 RATKA, 15 conventional). Outcomes assessed were Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Knee Society Score (KSS), and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) preoperatively and up to 1 year postoperatively. Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) was evaluated at 1 year. Radiographic parameters included hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and femoral component rotation. Alignment outliers were defined as a deviation of > ±3° from the target. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

RATKA resulted in significantly lower VAS pain scores at 2 weeks and 3 months (p < 0.05), with a consistent trend toward reduced pain at other timepoints. PROMs demonstrated improvements favoring RATKA across several KSS and KOOS subdomains at selected intervals. FJS-12 was higher in the RATKA group but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.12). Radiographic alignment was comparable between groups except for femoral component rotation, which showed greater external rotation in the conventional cohort (p = 0.009). RATKA significantly reduced alignment outliers (10.0% vs 40.0%, p = 0.042). No complications were observed.

Conclusion

The adoption of RATKA and functional alignment is associated with reduced early postoperative pain, modest improvements in PROMs, and improved consistency in achieving target alignment, without increased complications.

Keywords

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) / MAKO / Patient-reported outcome measures / Outliers / Rotational alignment

1. Lewis, P. L., Gill, D. R., & McAuliffe, M. J., et al. (2025). Hip, knee and shoulder arthroplasty: 2025 annual report. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.
2. Singh, M., Harary, J., & Schilling, P. L., et al. (2025). Patient satisfaction is nearly 90% after total knee arthroplasty; we are better than we were. Journal of Arthroplasty, 40(6), 1521–1525.
3. Bourne, R. B., Chesworth, B. M., Davis, A. M., et al. (2010). Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: Who is satisfied and who is not? Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 468(1), 57–63.
4. Bellemans, J., Colyn, W., Vandenneucker, H., et al. (2012). The Chitranjan Ranawat award: Is neutral mechanical alignment normal for all patients? The concept of constitutional varus. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 470(1), 45–53.
5. MacDessi, S. J., Griffiths-Jones, W., Harris, I. A., et al. (2021). Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification. Bone & Joint Journal, 103-B(2), 329–337.
6. Wong, W. K., Abu Bakar Sajak, A., & Chua, H. S. (2024). The distribution of Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) phenotypes in the Malaysian population and their correlation with demographic variables. Arthroplasty, 6(1), Article 60.
7. Oussedik, S., Abdel, M. P., Victor, J., et al. (2020). Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Bone & Joint Journal, 102-B(3), 276–279.
8. Lustig, S., Sappey-Marinier, E., Fary, C., et al. (2021). Personalized alignment in total knee arthroplasty: Current concepts. SICOT-J, 7, Article 19.
9. Marchand, R. C., Sodhi, N., Khlopas, A., et al. (2017). Patient satisfaction outcomes after robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty: A short-term evaluation. Journal of Knee Surgery, 30(9), 849–853.
10. Clark, G., Steer, R., & Wood, D. (2023). Functional alignment achieves a more balanced total knee arthroplasty than either mechanical alignment or kinematic alignment prior to soft tissue releases. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 31(4), 1420–1426.
11. Shatrov, J., Battelier, C., Sappey-Marinier, E., et al. (2022). Functional alignment philosophy in total knee arthroplasty – Rationale and technique for the varus morphotype using a CT based robotic platform and individualized planning. SICOT-J, 8, Article 11.
12. Kayani, B., Konan, S., Tahmassebi, J., et al. (2018). Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved early functional recovery and reduced time to hospital discharge compared with conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty: A prospective cohort study. Bone & Joint Journal, 100-B(7), 930–937.
13. Bhimani, S. J., Bhimani, R., Smith, A., et al. (2020). Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrates decreased postoperative pain and opioid usage compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty. Bone & Joint Open, 1(2), 8–12.
14. Stoltz, M. J., Smith, N. S., Abhari, S., et al. (2024). Patient-reported outcomes in robotic-assisted vs manual cementless total knee arthroplasty. Arthroplasty Today, 30, Article 101488.
15. Ali, M., Kamson, A., Yoo, C., et al. (2023). Early superior clinical outcomes in robotic-assisted TKA compared to conventional TKA in the same patient: A comparative analysis. Journal of Knee Surgery, 36(8), 814–819.
16. Nishitani, K., Yamamoto, Y., Furu, M., et al. (2019). The minimum clinically important difference for the Japanese version of the new Knee Society Score (2011KSS) after total knee arthroplasty. Journal of Orthopaedic Science, 24(6), 1053–1057.
17. Monticone, M., Ferrante, S., Salvaderi, S., et al. (2013). Responsiveness and minimal important changes for the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score in subjects undergoing rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 92(10), 864–870.
18. Lee, Y. M., Kim, G. W., Lee, C. Y., et al. (2023). No difference in clinical outcomes and survivorship for robotic, navigational, and conventional primary total knee arthroplasty with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery, 15(1), 82–91.
19. Nam, C. H., Lee, S. C., Kim, J. H., et al. (2022). Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty improves mechanical alignment and accuracy of component positioning compared to the conventional technique. Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, 9(1), Article 108