Short-term benefits of image-based robotic assistance in TKA after prior HTO: A comparative study.

Descombris, Sarah; Mesnard, Guillaume; Vermue, Hannes; Batailler, Cécile; Servien, Elvire; Lustig, Sébastien · J Exp Orthop · 2026

retrospective_cohort · Level III

Where this comes from

Abstract

High tibial osteotomy (HTO) is used to treat medial knee osteoarthritis with varus alignment in young, active patients. While robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may improve implant positioning and soft-tissue balance, its benefits in post-HTO patients remain unclear. This study compares surgical, clinical and radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted and conventional TKA following HTO. A retrospective study included 87 patients with prior HTO who underwent TKA between August 2017 and October 2023 (46 robotic-assisted and 41 conventional), with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Demographic data, surgical characteristics, clinical outcomes (Knee Society Score [KSS], range of motion), radiological alignment (hip-knee-ankle angle) and complications were analysed. Mean follow-up was 23 months. Operative time was similar between groups (82 vs. 95 min; <i>p</i> = 0.07). Robotic-assisted TKA was associated with fewer lateral releases (30% vs. 54%; <i>p</i> = 0.03) and no tibial tubercle osteotomies (0% vs. 10%; <i>p</i> = 0.03). Cruciate-substituting implants were used more frequently in the robotic group (13% vs. 0%; <i>p</i> = 0.001), whereas stemmed implants were more common in the conventional group (49% vs. 17%; <i>p</i> = 0.001). Postoperative KSS Knee scores were comparable between groups (<i>p</i> = 0.28), while KSS Function scores were slightly higher in the conventional group (<i>p</i> = 0.048). Complication rates did not differ significantly. Robotic-assisted TKA after HTO was associated with a similar operative times and comparable short-term clinical outcomes to conventional TKA. It was also associated with lower rates of additional procedures and a less frequent use of stemmed or constrained implants. These findings should be interpreted with caution, given the baseline differences between the groups. Longer follow-up is warranted. Level III, therapeutic studies, retrospective comparative study.