Mako is a reliable and proven technology. Since 2007, more than 100,000 joint replacement operations (total knee endoprostheses, total hip endoprostheses and partial knee prostheses) have been performed worldwide with Mako.
CT-based surgery planning is performed before the procedure in order to depict the individual anatomy of the patient, more specifically the kinematics of the knee ligaments in the case of knee surgery. During the procedure, the individual ligament tension of the patient is detailed and monitored on a screen using a 3D model. The surgeon uses robotic-arm assisted technology to mill the prosthesis base. In the event of deviation from planning, the milling process stops automatically. In a next step, the surgeon can then accurately insert and align the implant.
Clinical studies1 have shown that Mako Partial Knee offers two to three times better precision and three times the reproducibility compared to manual implantation of a partial knee prosthesis. These studies also found that patients who underwent a partial or total replacement reported significantly less postoperative pain and better functionality than patients whose knee prosthesis was implanted manually.
The robotic-arm assisted Mako procedure reduces postoperative pain from day one up to eight weeks after surgery2, lessening the occurrence of adverse events3 and achieving a high level of patient satisfaction.3
1 Blyth M, Jones B, MacLean A, Anthony I, Rowe P. Accuracy of UKA implant positioning and early clinical outcomes in a RCT comparing robotic assisted and manual surgery. 13th Annual CAOS Meeting 2013; Orlando, FL, USA. 2. Bell SW, Anthony I, Jones B, MacLean A, Rowe P, Blyth M. Improved Accuracy of Component Positioning with Robotic-Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery 2016;98:627-35.
B. KAYANI, S. KONAN, J. TAHMASSEBI, J. R. T. PIETRZAK, F. S. HADDAD. 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 J 2018;100-B:930–7.
2 Blyth M, Jones B, MacLean A, Anthony I, Rowe P. Accuracy of UKA implant positioning and early clinical outcomes in a RCT comparing robotic assisted and manual surgery. In: Proceedings 13th Annual Computer Assisted Orthopedic Surgery Meeting; June 12-15, 2013; Orlando, FL, USA. (Blyth/Jones 2013b).
3 Coon T, Roche M, Buechel F,et al. Short to mid term survivorship of robotic arm assisted UKA: a multicenter Study. In: Proceedings Annual Pan Pacific Orthopaedic Congress; July 16-19, 2014; Kona, HI.