Comparable outcomes between cruciate-substituting and posterior-stabilized inserts in robotic total knee arthroplasty under the functional alignment principles.

PURPOSE

Functional alignment (FA) has emerged as a personalized strategy in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to optimize outcomes by accounting for patient-specific anatomical and soft tissue characteristics. Limited evidence exists on how polyethylene insert type, specifically cruciate-substituting (CS) versus posterior-stabilized (PS), impacts clinical outcomes and complications in this context.

METHODS

This retrospective comparative study included 329 patients who underwent robotic-assisted TKA with FA principles with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were divided into two groups: CS or PS implants. CS inserts were selected for patients with an intact posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), while PS inserts were used in cases of PCL insufficiency or significant flexion contractures. Preoperative and post-operative outcomes, including Knee Society Scores (KSS), Forgotten Joint Scores (FJS), range of motion (ROM) and complications, were assessed. Implant survivorship was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 36 months, no significant differences were observed between CS and PS groups in KSS (knee: p = 0.45; function: p = 0.4), FJS (p = 0.7) or ROM (median flexion: 130° in both groups, p = 0.52). Specific complications included intraoperative lateral condyle fractures in the PS group and femoral component revisions due to instability in the CS group. The overall complication rates and implant survivorship were comparable (p = 0.55 and p = 0.85, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to evaluate polyethylene insert type in FA and demonstrates that both CS and PS inserts provide comparable outcomes and safety profiles in robotic-assisted TKA. These findings underscore the importance of patient-specific implant selection, with further research needed to assess long-term results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.