LAUSR

Purpose UKA has higher revision risk, particularly for lower volume surgeons. While robotic-arm assisted systems allow for increased accuracy, introduction of new systems has been associated with learning curves. The aim of this study was to determine the learning curve of a UKA robotic-arm assisted system. The hypothesis was that this may affect operative times, patient outcomes, limb alignment, and component placement. Methods Between 2017 and 2021, five surgeons performed 152 consecutive robotic-arm assisted primary medial UKA, and measurements of interest were recorded. Patient outcomes were measured with Oxford Knee Score, EuroQol-5D, and Forgotten Joint Score at 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years. Surgeons were grouped into ‘low’ and ‘high’ usage groups based on total UKA (manual and robotic) performed per year. Results A learning curve of 11 cases was found with operative time ( p  < 0.01), femoral rotation ( p  = 0.02), and insert sizing ( p  = 0.03), which highlighted areas that require care during the learning phase. Despite decreased 6-week EQ-5D-5L VAS in the proficiency group (77 cf. 85, p  < 0.01), no difference was found with implant survival (98.2%) between phases ( p  = 0.15), or between ‘high’ and ‘low’ usage surgeons ( p  = 0.23) at 36 months. This suggested that the learning curve did not lead to early adverse effects in this patient cohort. Conclusion Introduction of a UKA robotic-arm assisted system showed learning curves for operative times and insert sizing but not for implant survival at early follow-up. The short learning curve regardless of UKA usage indicated that robotic-arm assisted UKA may be particularly useful for low-usage surgeons. Level of evidence Level III, Retrospective cohort study.