MAKOplasty Robotic Replacements
Throughout his career, Dr. Denis Nam has had a special interest in robotic replacements and is now among the first to master this cutting-edge approach. Robotic assistance is the most innovative and advanced technology available, providing a level of precision and accuracy that can’t be achieved with manual techniques.
MAKOplasty Joint Replacement
Compared to traditional procedures, MAKOplasty robotic-arm assisted replacements are less invasive, and allow Dr. Nam to selectively target any damage while sparing the healthy bone and ligaments surrounding it. This approach often results in a more natural feeling replacement and shorter recovery time.
The procedure begins with a CT scan of the affected joint, which is then uploaded into the Mako system and a virtual 3D model is created. This allows Dr. Nam to see more details than an x-ray alone to determine the optimal size, placement, and positioning of the replacement. During the procedure, Mako provides real-time data that allows Dr. Nam to assess the movement and tension of each patient’s joint.
During the procedure, Dr. Nam removes the arthritic bone using a robotic-assisted surgical arm. Using real-time information, Dr. Nam then customizes the replacement to optimize the function and stability for each individual patient. He targets and removes any damage while sparing healthy bone and ligaments. A virtual boundary provides resistance to help Dr. Nam stay within the boundaries defined by your surgical plan. As he prepares to place the implant into its final position, the robotic-arm guides the implant at the desired angle determined in your surgical plan to ensure the placement and alignment of the implant are performed according to plan. This results in a joint replacement that genuinely mimics your own pre-arthritic joint – more natural; more comfortable.
The Mako Total Knee Replacement Difference:
- Improved accuracy in execution of the surgery 1, 2
- Minimized damage to the soft tissue and ligaments 3
- After six months, patients who opted for Mako robotic surgery reported lower pain scores compared to those who had a traditional joint replacement surgery 4
- Higher satisfaction overall comparatively with those who opted for traditional joint replacement surgery
The Mako Partial Knee Replacement Difference:
In clinical studies, Mako partial knee replacements resulted in:
- Improved accuracy related to removal of the bone and placement of the prosthesis (artificial joint), leading to better outcomes and knee function 5, 6
- Reduction of pain in the near term post-surgery 7
- Shorter hospital stay8
- Shortened recovery period. Three weeks post-surgery, Ninety percent of patients reported walking without the assistance of a cane or walker 9
The Mako Total Hip Replacement Difference:
In a clinical study, Mako total hip replacements resulted in:
- The prosthesis (artificial hip) placed more accurately10
- Reduced probability of dislocation post-surgery11, 12
- Reduction in loss of blood13
- A more natural-feeling hip 14
- More healthy bone preserved 15, 16
Is a Makoplasty Joint Replacement Right for You?
If you’re considering a joint replacement for your hip or knee pain, a robotic Makoplasty surgery with Dr. Nam may be right for you. Robotic Mako joint replacements are ideal for the following patients:
- Experiencing severe hip or knee pain or stiffness resulting from degenerative joint disease including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis, avascular necrosis, post-traumatic arthritis, or rheumatoid or inflammatory arthritides
- When traditional, more conservative treatments (injections, utilization of a brace, medications, etc.) have failed to provide relief
Think a robotic replacement could be right for you?
A Patient-Centric Approach
Patient Success Stories
Sarah needed to have both knees redone and wanted an experienced surgeon she could trust. Enter Dr. Nam. Read more about her revision experience and see how the right doctor can make a big difference.
Take the First Step
Have a question about robotics for Dr. Nam? Let us know how we can help. Submit your inquiry and our responsive team will share relevant insights and answers.
- Haddad, Fares. How Procedural Innovation Has Changed My Practice: Mako TKA. World Arthroplasty Congress Rome, IT April 2018
- Hampp EL, Scholl LY, Chang TC, et al Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrated greater accuracy to plan compared to manual technique. 17th annual CAOS Meeting, June 2017, Vol 1, 2017; 1-
- Kayani B., Konan S., Pietrziek J., Haddad F. S. Iatrogenic Bone and Soft Tissue Trauma in Robotic-Arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Compared With Conventional Jig-Based Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Cohort Study and Validation of a New Classification System. “https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29699827″J Arthroplasty. 2018 Aug;33(8):2496-2501.
- Marchand RC, Sodhi N, Khlopas A, Sultan AA, Harwin SF, Malkani AL, Mont MM. Patient satisfaction outcomes after robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty: a short-term evaluation. J Knee Surg. 2017 Nov;30(9):849-853.
- Blyth MJ, Anthony I, Rowe P, Banger MS, MacLean A, Jones B. Robotic-arm assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthoplasty: Exploratory secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Bone and Joint Research. 2017 Nov 16 (11):631-9.
- Bell SW; Anthony I; Jones B; MacLean A; Rowe P; Blyth M. Improved accuracy of component positioning with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: data from a prospective, randomized controlled study. J Bone and Joint Surg. 2016;98: 627-35.
- Baker Tilly, LLP. Mako robotic-arm assisted system: a clinical and economic analysis for health plans and providers. 2016.
- Coon T, Shi S, DeBattista J. Clinical and functional outcomes of robotic-arm assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. European Knee Society 2017 Annual Meeting. London, England. Poster No. P59. April 19-21, 2017.
- L Kleeblad, T Borus, T Coon, J Dounchis, J Nguyen, A Pearle. Midterm Survivorship and Patient Satisfaction of Robotic-Arm Assisted Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Study. The Journal of Arthroplasty, January 2018: 1-8.
- Domb BG, El Bitar YF, Sadik BS, Stake CE, Botser IB. Comparison of Robotic-assisted and Conventional Acetabular Cup Placement in THA: A Matched-Pair Controlled Study., Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 Jan;472(1):329-36
- Illgen R. Robotic Arm Assisted THA Improved Accuracy, Reproducibility, and Outcomes Compared to Conventional Technique. 43rd Annual Course: Advances in Arthroplasty, October 22-25, 2013, Boston, MA.
- Bukowski, B.; Abiola, R; Illgen R. Outcomes after primary total hip arthroplasty: Manual compared with robotic assisted techniques. ; 44th Annual Advances in Arthroplasty; Cambridge, MA. October 7-10 2014.
- Bukowski BR, Anderson P, Khlopas A, Chughtai M, Mont MA, Illgen RL Improved Functional Outcomes with Robotic Compared with Manual Total Hip Arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2016 Oct 26;XXIX:303-308.
- Itay Perets, John P. Walsh, Mary R. Close, Brian Mu, Leslie C. Yuen and Benjamin G. Domb. Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty – Clinical Outcomes and Complication Rate. SPEAKER: Itay Perets
- Suarez-Ahedo, C; Gui, C; Martin, T; Chandrasekaran, S; Domb, B. Robotic-arm assisted total hip arthoplasty results in smaller acetabular cup size in relation to the femoral head size: A Matched-Pair Controlled Study. Hip Int. 2017; 27 (2): 147-152.
- Nawabi DH; Conditt MA; Ranawat AS; Dunbar NJ; Jones, J; Banks S, Padgett DE. Haptically guided robotic technology in total hip arthroplasty – A cadaveric investigation. Journal of Engineering in Medicine. December 2012;227(3):302-309.