Advertisement
Letter to the editor| Volume 19, 101091, February 2023

Response to Comment on: Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Robotic Arm Technology

Open AccessPublished:January 31, 2023DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2022.101091
      The authors of “Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Robotic Arm Technology” [
      • MacAskill M.
      • Blickenstaff B.
      • Caughran A.
      • Bullock M.
      Revision total knee arthroplasty using robotic arm technology.
      ] would like to acknowledge the editors request for comment on a publishing concern regarding our article. We would like to congratulate Steelman et al [
      • Steelman K.
      • Carlson K.
      • Ketner A.
      Utilization of robotic arm assistance for revision of primary total knee arthroplasty: a case report.
      ] for being the first to publish on the topic in August 2021. Well before our article’s submission in September 2021, we performed an exhaustive literature search and were unable to locate the article by Steelman et al [
      • Steelman K.
      • Carlson K.
      • Ketner A.
      Utilization of robotic arm assistance for revision of primary total knee arthroplasty: a case report.
      ]. One must keep in mind the publishing delay due to the editing process once an article is submitted. Second, there is a known delay in PubMed indexing after an article is published [
      “Frequently ask questions about indexing for MEDLINE” National Library of Medicine.
      ]. At the time of our submission, “to our knowledge, there are no reports of robotic technology being used for the revision of a total knee arthroplasty” [
      • MacAskill M.
      • Blickenstaff B.
      • Caughran A.
      • Bullock M.
      Revision total knee arthroplasty using robotic arm technology.
      ].
      We have reviewed the article by Steelman et al [
      • Steelman K.
      • Carlson K.
      • Ketner A.
      Utilization of robotic arm assistance for revision of primary total knee arthroplasty: a case report.
      ] and openly appreciate their contributions to the field of robotic revision arthroplasty. Our case series is the result of extensive problem solving and critical thinking required to summarize our findings to maximize registration and modeling accuracy. Considering both articles, there are now currently 3 cases of knee revision using robotic-arm technology within the published literature with more to come. We acknowledge that “Utilization of Robotic Arm Assistance for Revision of Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Case Report” was published ahead of our case series [
      • Steelman K.
      • Carlson K.
      • Ketner A.
      Utilization of robotic arm assistance for revision of primary total knee arthroplasty: a case report.
      ]. Thank you.

      Conflicts of interest

      Matthew Bullock is a paid presenter for Smith & Nephew; is an unpaid consultant for Osso VR; has stock in Stryker; received educational support from Stryker, Smith & Nephew, Depuy, and Zimmer/Biomet; is a part of Editorial Board Arthroplasty Today; is a board member of AAKHS Patient Education Committee and West Virginia Orthopaedic Society Education Committee. The other authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.
      For full disclosure statements refer to https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2022.101091.

      Appendix A. Supplementary Data

      References

        • MacAskill M.
        • Blickenstaff B.
        • Caughran A.
        • Bullock M.
        Revision total knee arthroplasty using robotic arm technology.
        Arthroplast Today. 2021; 13: 35-42
        • Steelman K.
        • Carlson K.
        • Ketner A.
        Utilization of robotic arm assistance for revision of primary total knee arthroplasty: a case report.
        J Orthop Case Rep. 2021; 11: 50-54
      1. “Frequently ask questions about indexing for MEDLINE” National Library of Medicine.
        ([accessed 14.12.22])

      Linked Article