7 Reasons Surgeons Prefer Robotic Knee Surgery Over Traditional
With benefits ranging from pain relief to restored mobility, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has long been considered one of the most effective surgical procedures for patients with advanced osteoarthritis or other degenerative joint diseases.1 However, despite its success, traditional TKA has its limitations. Variability in functional outcomes with TKA can lead to dissatisfaction, persistent pain, or the need for revision surgery.2
By improving the precision of implant positioning through three-dimensional preoperative planning and intraoperative overhead active tracking, robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (raTKA) has the potential to improve outcomes and increase patient satisfaction over traditional TKA. In fact, a growing body of clinical research has demonstrated benefits ranging from improved implant positioning to faster patient recovery.3
Both patients and surgeons alike have begun to display a preference for robotic-assisted TKA over traditional methods.4 Let’s explore some of the top reasons why.
1. Accuracy & Precision
One of the defining advantages of raTKA is its precision in bone resections and component alignment.3 Traditional TKA utilizes intramedullary and extramedullary guides, which may introduce variability in measurements and alignment.5 As a result, traditional methods may produce more radiographic outliers compared to raTKA.5
The TMINI® Miniature Robotic System employs preoperative CT imaging and an overhead active tracking system to promote accurate and precise implant placement according to the surgical plan.6 This precision can help minimize human error and allows surgeons to execute the preoperative plan as intended.6
Clinical studies consistently confirm the superior accuracy of robotic-assisted methods.7,8 In the majority of cases, raTKA has displayed an ability to achieve femoral and tibial resections within 1° of the planned alignment.7 This heightened precision has direct implications for patient outcomes: correctly aligned implants distribute loads more evenly across the joint, reducing the risk of uneven wear and premature loosening.8
2. More Consistent Results
Consistency is a critical determinant of success in a TKA practice. While manual surgery outcomes can vary based on surgeon experience, patient anatomy, and intraoperative conditions, robotic systems maintain consistency in the surgical procedure by compensating for these factors, ensuring procedure adheres closely to the preoperative plan.9
Research studies have shown that raTKA substantially reduces variability.10,11 In one study comparing robotic-assisted and traditional TKAs, the robotic-assisted group was able to achieve an improved accuracy in alignment, higher accuracy of component positioning, and more consistent, thinner polyethylene liner thicknesses.10
Being able to reproduce reliable results also benefits patients.11 In one study, 94% of raTKA patients reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their experience, compared to 82% of manual TKA patients.11 Moreover, the robotic-assisted approach tended to yield superior average scores across all five satisfaction questions.11
3. Better Implant Positioning
When it comes to long-term outcomes, proper implant positioning can be an important factor.12 Malalignment can result in abnormal knee kinematics, increased polyethylene wear, instability, and pain.12 Because traditional TKA techniques depend on visual estimation and traditional guides that are designed on anatomic averages,13 implant positioning may be influenced by the patient’s individual anatomy and intraoperative judgment.
The TMINI® Miniature Robotic System allows for individualized, patient-specific positioning based on preoperative CT scans. Surgeons can adjust component placement in real time to account for anatomical variations and achieve the most functional alignment for each patient using the TMINI PROTM Workflow.
By improving the accuracy of implant positioning and limb alignment, raTKA may result in fewer alignment outliers, better soft tissue preservation, and improved early functional outcomes.14,15
4. Improved Soft Tissue Balance
Achieving balanced ligaments and soft tissue tension is important for functional stability, range of motion, and patient satisfaction after TKA.16 Collateral soft tissue release during TKA procedures can contribute to post-operative hematomas, wound complications, elevated risk of infection, increased post-operative bleeding, and longer average hospital stays.17,18
Technology like the TMINI System and its TMINI PROTM Workflow for Positional Refinement & Optimization enable patient-specific adjustments that can achieve balance without unnecessary soft tissue release.19 By improving the precision of bone resections, raTKA can help surgeons achieve soft tissue balance through bone , which may reduce the risk of complications associated with soft tissue releases and improve long-term functional outcomes.20
5. Faster Patient Recovery
Patients considering a TKA often want to know how quickly they can return to their normal activities after surgery. While long-term recovery is similar to traditional and robotic-assisted methods, there may be early post-operative benefits associated with raTKA.3
The use of raTKA has been shown to significantly lower postoperative pain, which is a key prognostic factor of dissatisfaction with TKA procedures.21 In some studies, the use of raTKA has also been shown to reduce opioid consumption and increase the number of patients free of opioid use at six weeks post-op.21
By minimizing the need for extensive soft tissue releases and ensuring more precise bone cuts, raTKA may reduce intraoperative trauma.22 Increased surgical accuracy may help to improve early post-operative quality of life in patients.3 It could also reduce healthcare costs by supporting shorter hospital stays and higher rates of discharge home without increasing the rate of complications.22
6. Less Intersurgeon Variability
Variations in surgical techniques, decision-making skills, and experience play a critical role in determining TKA outcomes.23 These variations can also influence patient-reported measures, length of hospital stay, and rates of complications.23 While patient characteristics (like age and body mass index) certainly contribute to these outcomes, the impact of the surgeon may be even more pronounced.23
The TMINI® Miniature Robotic System may reduce surgical variance by facilitating more accurate and precise placement of implants.6 A key benefit of raTKA is its effectiveness in decreasing alignment outliers and restoring overall limb alignment with enhanced accuracy.24
Overall, these findings suggest that raTKA not only enhances precision in implant placement also improves coronal and sagittal alignment.10 This reduction in variability enhances institutional performance and supports value-based care models, where consistent, high-quality outcomes are critical for both reimbursement and patient trust
7. More Control During Procedures
One advantage of raTKA is the level of intraoperative control it provides to surgeons. Traditional TKA often requires intraoperative estimation and adjustment, with limited ability to objectively measure the impact of changes. By contrast, the TMINI® Miniature Robotic System integrates CT-based 3D surgical planning, and the TMINI PROTM Workflow enables intraoperative adjustments to help fine-tune implant positioning and stability.
For example, surgeons can virtually adjust tibial slope or femoral rotation and immediately assess the impact on joint line restoration, soft tissue tension, and overall limb alignment. This ability to fine-tune intraoperative decisions enhances both confidence and accuracy.6
This enhanced control is particularly important in complex cases, such as severe deformities, to help guide the surgeon’s placement of the implant and reduce soft-tissue releases.20 
Conclusion
The use of raTKA represents a shift in joint replacement surgery. By integrating imaging, planning, and active overhead tracking, raTKA addresses many of the limitations inherent in manual methods. Clinical studies are demonstrating achievable benefits across seven domains:
- Accuracy and Precision – Sub-millimeter bone resections and alignment accuracy.6
- More Consistent Results – Standardized outcomes independent of surgeon variability.23
- Better Implant Positioning – Reduced malalignment and fewer radiographic outliers.15
- Improved Soft Tissue Balance – Objective, reproducible ligament balancing with less need for soft-tissue releases.20
- Faster Patient Recovery – Reduced pain, lower opioid use, and shorter hospital stays.21,22
- Less Variation Between Surgeries – Greater reproducibility across surgeons and institutions.23
- More Control During Procedures – Intraoperative flexibility and real-time feedback for optimal outcomes.
As the use of robotic technology in knee replacement continues to expand, raTKA may become increasingly integrated into standard surgical practice. Current evidence suggests that it can provide improvements in accuracy, consistency, and intraoperative control compared with conventional techniques.15,23 For surgeons, these tools may support more precise planning and execution, while for patients, they may contribute to smoother recovery at home and potentially reduced pain.21,22
1 Shan L, Shan B, Suzuki A, Nouh F, Saxena A. Intermediate and long-term quality of life after total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JBJS Am. 2015;97:156-168.
2 Desmeules F, Dionne CE, Belzile ÉL, Bourbonnais R, Champagne F, Frémont P. Determinants of pain, functional limitations and health-related quality of life six months after total knee arthroplasty: results from a prospective cohort study. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2013;5:2.
3 Zhang J, Ndou WS, Ng N, et al. Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved accuracy and patient reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022;30(8):2677-2695.
4 The AJRR Annual Report. https://www.aaos.org/registries/publications/ajrr-annual-report/. Accessed 8.28.2025.
5 Onggo JR, Onggo JD, De Steiger R, Hau R. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty is comparable to conventional total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020;140(10):1533-1549.
6 Data is based on TMINI System assisted placement of cut guide compared to planned placement.
7 Kayani B, Haddad FS. Robotic total knee arthroplasty: clinical outcomes and directions for future research. Bone Joint Res. 2019;8(10):438-442.
8 Insall JN, Binazzi R, Soudry M, Mestriner LA. Total knee arthroplasty. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 1985;192:13-22.
9 MKG-24-09 ID-HUB Interactive Brochure.
10 Baek J-H, Lee SC, Lee DN, Heo J, Kim T, Ahn HS, et al. (2024) Better accuracy of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty compared to conventional technique in patients with failed high tibial osteotomy. PLoS ONE 19(11): e0313391.
11 Smith AF, Eccles CJ, Bhimani SJ, et al. Improved Patient Satisfaction following Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2021;34(7):730-738.
12 Johnston H, Abdelgaied A, Pandit H, Fisher J, Jennings LM. The effect of surgical alignment and soft tissue conditions on the kinematics and wear of a fixed bearing total knee replacement. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019;100:103386.
13 Jang SJ, Kunze KN, Casey JC, et al. Variability of the femoral mechanical-anatomical axis angle and its implications in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty. Bone Jt Open. 2024;5(2):101-108.
14 Kayani B, Konan S, Huq SS, Tahmassebi J, Haddad FS. Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty has a learning curve of seven cases for integration into the surgical workflow but no learning curve effect for accuracy of implant positioning. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(4):1132-1141.
15 Byrne C, Durst C, Rezzadeh K, Rockov Z, Moon C, Rajaee S. Robotic-assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Reduces Radiographic Outliers for Low-volume Total Knee Arthroplasty Surgeons. Arthroplast Today. 2024;25:101303.
16 Meloni MC, Hoedemaeker RW, Violante B, Mazzola C. Soft tissue balancing in total knee arthroplasty. Joints. 2014;2(1):37-40.
17 Kumar PJ, Dorr LD. Severe malalignment and soft tissue imbalance in total knee arthroplasty. Am J Knee Surg. 1997;10:36–41.
18 Molloy DO, Mockford BJ, Wilson RK, Beverland DE. Blood loss following soft tissue release in total knee arthroplasty of the valgus knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;87-B(Suppl II):156.
19 TMINI 1.1 FDA 510(k) Press Release.
20 Spitzer A, Gorab R, Barrett W, et al. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty reduces soft-tissue releases which improves functional outcomes: A retrospective study. Knee. 2024;49:52-61.
21 Bhimani SJ, Bhimani R, Smith A, Eccles C, Smith L, Malkani A. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrates decreased postoperative pain and opioid usage compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty. Bone Jt Open. 2020;1(2):8-12.
22 Khan ST, Emara AK, Zhou G, et al. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty in the USA: Nationwide adoption trends towards 70 % by 2030. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2025;68:103069.
23 Sinclair ST, Klika AK, Jin Y, Higuera CA, Piuzzi NS; on behalf of the Cleveland Clinic OME Arthroplasty Group. The Impact of Surgeon Variability on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures, Length of Stay, Discharge Disposition, and 90-Day Readmission in TKA. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022;104(22):2016-2025.
24 Riantho A, Butarbutar JCP, Fidiasrianto K, et al. Radiographic Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. JB JS Open Access. 2023;8(2):e23.00010.
25 Yu ZA, Gorgone MB. Pay-for-Performance and Value-Based Care. [Updated 2024 May 2]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK607995/.
MKG-25-133 Rev01