A retrospective study comparing a single surgeon's experience on manual versus robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty after the learning curve of the latter procedure – A cohort study

Adverse events associated with robotic-assistance in total hip arthroplasty: an analysis based on the FDA MAUDE database

BACKGROUND

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) maintains the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database for reporting adverse events associated with medical devices, including emerging technologies, such as robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA). Aim of this study was to evaluate the variation of adverse events associated with robotics in THA.

METHODS

Medical device reports (MDRs) within the MAUDE database were identified between 2017 and 2021. For MDR identification the product class "orthopaedic stereotaxic equipment" and terms associated with THA were used. Individual adverse events were identified and organised by type and consequences, such as patient injury, surgical delay, or conversion to the manual technique.

RESULTS

521 MDRs constituting 546 discrete events were found. The most common reported complication was intraoperative hardware failure (304/546, 55.7%), among which the most common failure was a broken impaction handle/platform (110, 20.1%). Inaccurate cup placement was the second most common reported complication (63, 11.5%). Abandoning the robot occurred in 13.0% (71/521) of reports. A surgical delay was noted in 28% (146/521) of reports, with an average delay of 17.9 (range 1-60) minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying complications that may occur with robotics in THA is an important first step in preventing adverse events and surgical delays. Database analysis provide an overview of the range of complications.

MAKO robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: a comprehensive meta-analysis of efficacy and safety outcomes

BACKGROUND

Introduction: Robotic surgery in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has emerged as a promising approach for improving precision and reducing errors. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted MAKO total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

Studies were searched using four databases. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4. Efficacy was assessed radiologically, and functional scores and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (1224 hips) were analyzed. The MAKO group achieved greater cup anteversion (MD 1.53, 95%CI 1.04-2.03) and a higher percentage of components within safe inclination and anteversion ranges (p > 0.05). Harris Hip Scores did not differ significantly (MD 0.61, 95%CI -0.22-1.45) but the forgotten joint scores favored MAKO (MD 5.99, 95% CI 4.10-7.88), although not exceeding the minimally clinically significant difference. No differences in intraoperative complications emerged (OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.51-1.79) but preoperative plans significantly mismatched the final cup placement after MAKO (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the MAKO robot in THA improves radiological outcomes by enhancing safe prosthesis placement. However, no significant differences were observed in terms of complications. Longer follow-up studies are required to assess the clinical impact of improved radiological results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV metaanalysis of nonrandomized clinical trials.

REGISTRATION

CRD42023433733.

Precise Acetabular Prosthesis Positioning Using a Novel Robot-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty System: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is currently one of the most effective treatment methods for end-stage hip joint disease, and its long-term effectiveness largely depends on the accurate placement of the acetabular prosthesis. In conventional surgery, the placement of the acetabular prosthesis mainly relies on the surgeon's clinical experience and surgical techniques. To further improve the accuracy of prosthesis placement, a new robotic system for THA is designed. The purpose of this study is to verify the effectiveness and safety of THA assisted by this robotic system.

METHOD

A multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled, superiority study design was adopted with statistical methods of t test and Chi-squared test. Participants undergoing primary THA have been enrolled in three centers of joint surgery in China since July 17, 2023. Robotic THA was operated in the experimental group, and conventional instruments were used in the control group. The primary outcome is the proportion of anteversion and inclination angles in the safe zone. The secondary outcomes include operation time, WOMAC score, Harris score, SF-36 health questionnaire, dislocation rate of hip joint, and rates of adverse events and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were included in this study. The proportion of both anteversion and inclination angles in the safe zone was 92.2% in the experimental group and 50.8% in the control group, with significant difference (p < 0.01). The average operation time in the experimental group and control group was 116.4 and 80.5 min respectively, with significant difference (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in WOMAC score, Harris score, and SF-36 between the two groups (6 ± 2) weeks after operation (p > 0.05). The dislocation rate of hip joint in the experimental group and control group were 3.0% and 1.5%, respectively, without significant difference (p > 0.05). The rate of adverse events and severe adverse events in the experimental group and control group also showed no significant difference (p > 0.05). No adverse events or serious adverse events were judged to be "definitely related" to the experimental instruments.

CONCLUSION

Robotic THA could prolong the operation time within an acceptable range, but more precise acetabular prosthesis positioning could be obtained when compared with conventional surgery. Besides, no significant difference was found in function scores, dislocation rate or other adverse events, which indicates that this new robot system shows both good effectiveness and safety in THA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials: NCT05947734.

Robot-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty is Associated With an Increased Risk of Periprosthetic Fracture

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) aims to restore joint function and relieve pain. New technology, such as robot assistance, offers the potential to reduce human error, improve precision, and improve postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between conventional and robot-assisted THA.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study utilizing a national database from 2016 to 2019. Patients undergoing THA, conventional or robot-assisted, were identified via the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code. Multivariate regressions were performed to assess outcomes between groups. Negative binomial regressions were performed to assess discharge disposition, readmission, and reoperation. Gamma regressions with log-link were used to assess total charges and lengths of hospital stays. Patient demographics and comorbidities, measured via the Elixhauser comorbidity index, were controlled for in our analyses. A total of 1,216,395 patients undergoing THA, 18,417 (1.51%) with robotic assistance, were identified.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing robot-assisted procedures had increased surgical complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.31 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14 to 1.53]; P < .001), including periprosthetic fracture (OR 1.63 [95% CI 1.35 to 1.98]; P < .001). Notably, these patients also had significantly greater total charges (OR 1.20 [95% CI 1.11 to 1.30]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic assistance in THA is associated with an increased risk of surgical complications, including periprosthetic fracture, while incurring greater charges.

STUDY DESIGN

Level III; Retrospective Cohort Study.

The learning curve for robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty in low, medium, and high-volume surgeons

Background

Robotic systems have been designed to increase the accuracy of implant alignment in total knee and hip arthroplasty. This technology is associated with a learning curve for the operative time to reach peak efficiency in its use. Prior studies done on high-volume orthopedic surgeons have suggested a learning curve of 14-35 cases for robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is unclear if this learning curve is different for surgeons with lower volumes.

Methods

Data was collected retrospectively from 299 THA procedures done by three different surgeons, with low (1-15 cases/year), medium (16-50), and high (51+) volume caseload. The learning curve was assessed primarily by average operative time from cases 1-20, 21-50, and 51+.

Results

The high-volume surgeon had a learning curve of 20 cases, while the low and medium volume surgeons had no significant decrease in their operative time through the cases included in the study (20 and 63, respectively).

Conclusions

High volume surgeons have a learning curve of about 20 cases, while low and medium volume surgeons have a longer curve, which was not able to be measured in this study.

Radiographic evaluation of robot-assisted versus manual total hip arthroplasty: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of robot-assisted surgery remains contentious due to the lack of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to elevate the level of evidence. We aimed to evaluate the postoperative radiographic outcomes of robot-assisted (RAS-THA) versus manual (M-THA) total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

This multicenter RCT was performed from March 1, 2021 to December 1, 2021. Patients were randomly assigned to routine M-THA or to RAS-THA that used the TRex-RS orthopedic joint surgical navigation system. The primary outcome was to compare the acetabular component orientation, femoral stem alignment, femoral canal fill ratio, and leg length discrepancy between RAS-THA and M-THA using postoperative radiography. Subgroup analyses of the two groups stratified by surgical approach, gender, and BMI were also conducted.

RESULTS

Seventy-three participants were randomly allocated to the RAS-THA group, while seventy-two participants were assigned to the M-THA group. Compared to the M-THA group, the RAS-THA group exhibited less variability in the preoperative planning of the vertical center of rotation (VCOR; P < 0.001), demonstrated a significant advantage in femoral stem alignment (P = 0.004), and showed pronounced decreases in inequality and in the variability in leg length discrepancy (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the Lewinnek safe-zone ratio (P = 0.081) and the femoral canal fill ratio (P > 0.05) between the two groups. Further subgroup analysis also showed that the RAS-THA group had fewer horizontal center of rotation (HCOR) and leg length differences when stratified by surgical approach, gender, and overweight status.

CONCLUSION

This RCT found that, regardless of the surgical approach, gender, or body mass index, RAS-THA can effectively improve the postoperative VCOR and significantly reduce the variability of leg length difference. RAS-THA should be considered an effective method to enhance surgical precision by achieving less variability in challenging patients with leg length discrepancies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100044124.

A new seven-axis robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty system improves component positioning: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study

This study compared the radiologic and clinical outcomes of a new seven-axis robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) and conventional THA. Hundred and four patients were randomly assigned to two groups-the robotic-assisted THA group (RAS group) and the conventional THA group (CON group). The preoperative and postoperative Harris Hip score (HHS), acetabular inclination, anteversion, femoral offset, and leg length discrepancy (LLD) were compared. During the follow-up, no patients had any complications that could be associated with the use of the robot. The proportion of acetabular cups in the safety zone was significantly higher in the RAS group than that in the CON group. The two groups had significantly different mean absolute difference of inclination and anteversion. There was no significant difference in the postoperative HHSs, changes in HHSs, femoral offset, and lower limb length between the two groups. The seven-axis robotic-assisted THA system is safe and effective, and leads to better acetabulum cup positioning compared to conventional THA. The improvements observed in the HHS, LLD, and femoral offset in the RAS group were similar to those in the CON group.Clinical trial registration time: 19/05/2022.Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR2200060115.

Robotic-assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty and Spinopelvic Parameters: A Review

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an effective treatment for osteoarthritis, and the popularity of the direct anterior approach has increased due to more rapid recovery and increased stability. Instability, commonly caused by component malposition, remains a significant concern. The dynamic relationship between the pelvis and lumbar spine, deemed spinopelvic motion, is considered an important factor in stability. Various parameters are used in evaluating spinopelvic motion. Understanding spinopelvic motion is critical, and executing a precise plan for positioning the implant can be difficult with manual instrumentation. Robotic and/or navigation systems have been developed in the effort to enhance THA outcomes and for implementing spinopelvic parameters. These systems can be classified into three categories: X-ray/fluoroscopy-based, imageless, and computed tomography (CT)-based. Each system has advantages and limitations. When using CT-based systems, preoperative CT scans are used to assist with preoperative planning and intraoperative execution, providing feedback on implant position and restoration of hip biomechanics within a functional safe zone developed according to each patient's specific spinopelvic parameters. Several studies have demonstrated the accuracy and reproducibility of robotic systems with regard to implant positioning and leg length discrepancy. Some studies have reported better radiographic and clinical outcomes with use of robotic-assisted THA. However, clinical outcomes comparable to those for manual THA have also been reported. Robotic systems offer advantages in terms of accuracy, precision, and potentially reduced rates of dislocation. Additional research, including conduct of randomized controlled trials, will be required in order to evaluate the long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted THA.

The learning curve of a novel seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty system: a randomized controlled trial

BACGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve of a novel seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RaTHA) system.

METHODS

A total of 59 patients who underwent unilateral total hip arthroplasty at our institution from June 2022 to September 2022 were prospectively included in the study. In this randomized controlled clinical trial, robot-assisted THA (RaTHA) and Conventional THA (CoTHA) were performed using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis to evaluate the learning curve of the RaTHA system. The demographic data, preopera1tive clinical data, duration of operation, postoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS), postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and duration of operation between the learning stage and the proficiency stage of the RaTHA group were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The average duration of operation of the RaTHA group was increased by 34.73 min compared with the CoTHA group (104.26 ± 19.33 vs. 69.53 ± 18.38 min, p < 0.01). The learning curve of the RaTHA system can be divided into learning stage and proficiency stage, and the former consists of the first 13 cases by CUSUM analysis. In the RaTHA group, the duration of operation decreased by 29.75 min in the proficiency stage compared to the learning stage (121.12 ± 12.84 vs.91.37 ± 12.92, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that the surgical team required a learning curve of 13 cases to become proficient using the RaTHA system. The duration of operation, total blood loss, and drainage gradually shortened (decreased) with the learning curve stage, and the differences were statistically significant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Number: ChiCTR2200061630, Date: 29/06/2022.

Contemporary analysis of the learning curve for robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty emerging technologies

Robotic assisted (RA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) offers improved acetabular component placement and radiographic outcomes, but inconsistent assessment methods of its learning curves render the evaluation of adopting novel platforms challenging. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to assess the learning curve associated with RA-THA, both tracking a surgeon's performance across initial cases and comparing their performance to manual THA (M-THA). PubMed, MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, and Google Scholar were searched on June 16, 2023, to identify studies published between January 1, 2000 and June 16, 2023 (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023437339). The query yielded 655 unique articles, which were screened for eligibility. The final analysis included 11 articles, evaluating 1351 THA procedures. Risk of bias was assessed via the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) tool. The mean MINORS score was 21.3 ± 0.9. RA-THA provided immediate improvements in acetabular component placement accuracy and radiographic outcomes compared to M-THA, with little to no experience required to achieve peak proficiency. A modest learning curve (12-17 cases) was associated with operative time, which was elevated compared to M-THA (+ 9-13 min). RA-THA offers immediate advantages to M-THA for component placement accuracy and radiographic outcomes. Surgeons should expect to experience increased operative times, which become less pronounced or equivalent to M-THA after a modest caseload.

A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing CT-based planning with conventional total hip arthroplasty versus robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty

Aims

Achieving accurate implant positioning and restoring native hip biomechanics are key surgeon-controlled technical objectives in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The primary objective of this study was to compare the reproducibility of the planned preoperative centre of hip rotation (COR) in patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted THA versus conventional THA.

Methods

This prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) included 60 patients with symptomatic hip osteoarthritis undergoing conventional THA (CO THA) versus robotic arm-assisted THA (RO THA). Patients in both arms underwent pre- and postoperative CT scans, and a patient-specific plan was created using the robotic software. The COR, combined offset, acetabular orientation, and leg length discrepancy were measured on the pre- and postoperative CT scanogram at six weeks following surgery.

Results

There were no significant differences for any of the baseline characteristics including spinopelvic mobility. The absolute error for achieving the planned horizontal COR was median 1.4 mm (interquartile range (IQR) 0.87 to 3.42) in RO THA versus 4.3 mm (IQR 3 to 6.8; p < 0.001); vertical COR mean 0.91 mm (SD 0.73) in RO THA versus 2.3 mm (SD 1.3; p < 0.001); and combined offset median 2 mm (IQR 0.97 to 5.45) in RO THA versus 3.9 mm (IQR 2 to 7.9; p = 0.019). Improved accuracy was observed with RO THA in achieving the desired acetabular component positioning (root mean square error for anteversion and inclination was 2.6 and 1.3 vs 8.9 and 5.3, repectively) and leg length (mean 0.6 mm vs 1.4 mm; p < 0.001). Patient-reported outcome measures were comparable between the two groups at baseline and one year. Participants in the RO THA group needed fewer physiotherapy sessions postoperatively (median six (IQR 4.5 to 8) vs eight (IQR 6 to 11; p = 0.005).

Conclusion

This RCT suggested that robotic-arm assistance in THA was associated with improved accuracy in restoring the native COR, better preservation of the combined offset, leg length correction, and superior accuracy in achieving the desired acetabular component positioning. Further evaluation through long-term and registry data is necessary to assess whether these findings translate into improved implant survival and functional outcomes.

[Translated article] Clinical results of total hip arthroplasty assisted by robotic arm in Spain: Preliminary study

OBJECTIVES

Clinical, radiological and functional results of the first Spanish series of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty assisted by Mako® (Stryker) robotic arm at the Hospital Clínico San Carlos (HCSC) in Madrid.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective and descriptive study analyzing the first 25 patients who underwent robotic-assisted THA at the HCSC, with a minimum follow-up of 4 months. Demographics, imaging studies (Mako® processing, Rx and CT), clinical parameters, functionality (modified Harris) and associated complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Average age was 67.2 years (min 47, max 88), being 56% male population sample. 88% involves primary coxarthrosis, 4% post-traumatic coxarthrosis, 4% secondary avascular necrosis and 4% secondary femoroacetabular impingement. Average surgery time was 116.9min (min 92, max 150). The average time of the first five surgeries was 122.6min, and, regarding the last five interventions, it was 108.2min. Found medical intraoperative complications were four intraoperative markers loss. Average admission time was 4.4days (min 3, max 7), with an average postoperative haemoglobin decrease of 3.08±1.08g/dl, requiring a transfusion in 12% of the cases. Three medical complications have been registered in the meantime of the admission, with a relevant case of a confusional syndrome and a fall, which resulted in a non-displaced AG1 periprosthetic fracture. The analysis of the positioning of registered implants with Mako® system shows 40.55±1.53 acetabular inclination degrees and 12.2±3.6 acetabular anteversion degrees. The postoperative image study carried out on patients, are consistent with Mako® results, as it shows an acetabular inclination of 41.2±1.7 in Rx, as well as acetabular anteversion of 16±4.6 in CT. Hip length variance ranges depending on preoperative values of 3.91mm (SD: 3.9; min -12, max 3) to 1.29mm (SD: 1.96) after surgery registered with Mako®, with an increase of an average hip length of 5.64mm (SD: 3.35). Rx simple study results show a postoperative difference between both hips of 0.5±3.08mm, which is consistent with Mako® results. Native femoral offset was stable after surgery with a showing difference both pre and post operative of the intervened hip of 0.1mm (SD: 3.7), registered with Mako®. Preoperatory modified Harris punctuation was 41.6±13.3, improving to postoperative values of 74.6±9.7 after four months since the surgery. No complications were registered in immediate postoperative (4 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Total hip arthroplasty robot-assisted achieves an adequate precision and repeatability of the implant positioning and the postoperative hip dysmetry without showing an increase of associated complications to the technique applied. Surgery time, complications and functional results in a short-time period are similar to conventional techniques applied to great series previously published.

Clinical results of total hip arthroplasty assisted by robotic arm in Spain: Preliminary study

OBJECTIVES

Clinical, radiological and functional results of the first Spanish series of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty assisted by Mako® (Stryker) robotic arm at the Hospital Clínico San Carlos (HCSC) in Madrid.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective and descriptive study analyzing the first 25 patients who underwent robotic-assisted THA at the HCSC, with a minimum follow-up of 4months. Demographics, imaging studies (Mako® processing, Rx and CT), clinical parameters, functionality (modified Harris) and associated complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Average age was 67.2years (min 47, max 88), being 56% male population sample. 88% involves primary coxarthrosis, 4% post-traumatic coxarthrosis, 4% secondary avascular necrosis and 4% secondary femoroacetabular impingement. Average surgery time was 116.9min (min 92, max 150). The average time of the first five surgeries was 122.6min, and, regarding the last five interventions, it was 108.2min. Found medical intraoperative complications were four intraoperative markers loss. Average admission time was 4.4days (min 3, max 7), with an average postoperative hemoglobin decrease of 3.08±1.08g/dL, requiring a transfusion in 12% of the cases. Three medical complications have been registered in the meantime of the admission, with a relevant case of a confusional syndrome and a fall, which resulted in a non-displaced AG1 periprosthetic fracture. The analysis of the positioning of registered implants with Mako® system shows 40.55±1.53 acetabular inclination degrees and 12.2±3.6 acetabular anteversion degrees. The postoperative image study carried out on patients, are consistent with Mako® s results, as it shows an acetabular inclination of 41.2±1.7 in Rx, as well as acetabular anteversion of 16±4.6 in CT. Hip length variance ranges depending on preoperative values of 3.91mm (SD: 3.9; min -12, max 3) to 1.29mm (SD: 1.96) after surgery registered with Mako®, with an increase of an average hip length of 5.64mm (SD: 3.35). Rx simple study results show a postoperative difference between both hips of 0.5±3.08mm, which is consistent with Mako® results. Native femoral offset was stable after surgery with a showing difference both pre and post operative of the intervened hip of 0.1mm (SD: 3.7), registered with Mako®. Preoperatory modified Harris punctuation was 41.6±13.3, improving to postoperative values of 74.6±9.7 after four months since the surgery. No complications were registered in immediate postoperative (4month).

CONCLUSIONS

Total hip arthroplasty robot-assisted achieves an adequate precision and repeatability of the implant positioning and the postoperative hip dysmetry without showing an increase of associated complications to the technique applied. Surgery time, complications and functional results in a short-time period are similar to conventional techniques applied to great series previously published.

The LANCET robotic system can improve surgical efficiency in total hip arthroplasty: A prospective randomized, multicenter, parallel-controlled clinical trial

Objective

To evaluate the accuracy and safety of the LANCET robotic system, a robot arm assisted operation system for total hip arthroplasty via a multicenter clinical randomized controlled trial.

Methods

A total of 116 patients were randomized into two groups: LANCET robotic arm assisted THA group (N = 58) and the conventional THA group (N = 58). General information about the patients was collected preoperatively. Operational time and bleeding were recorded during the surgery. The position of the acetabular prosthesis was evaluated by radiographs one week after surgery and compared with preoperative planning. Harris score, hip mobility, prosthesis position and angle and complications were compared between the two groups at three months postoperatively.

Results

None of the 111 patients who ultimately completed the 3-month follow-up experienced adverse events such as hip dislocation and infection during follow-up. In the RAA group, 52 (92.9 %) patients were located in the Lewinnek safe zone and 49 (87.5 %) patients were located in the Callanan safe zone. In the control group were 47 (85.5 %) and 44 (80.0 %) patients, respectively. In the RAA group, 53 (94.6 %) patients had a postoperative acetabular inclination angle and 51 (91.1 %) patients had an acetabular version angle within a deviation of 5° from the preoperative plan. These numbers were significantly higher than those of the control group, which consisted of 42 (76.4 %) and 34 (61.8 %) patients respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups of subjects in terms of general condition, intraoperative bleeding, hip mobility, and adverse complications.

Conclusion

The results of this prospective randomized, multicenter, parallel-controlled clinical study demonstrated that the LANCET robotic system leads conventional THA surgery in accuracy of acetabular cup placement and does not differ from conventional THA surgery in terms of postoperative hip functional recovery and complications.

The translational potential of this article

In the past, the success rate of total hip arthroplasty (THA) relied heavily on the surgeon's experience. As a result, junior doctors needed extensive training to become proficient in this technique. However, the introduction of surgical robots has significantly improved this situation. By utilizing robotic assistance, both junior and senior doctors can perform THA quickly and efficiently. This advancement is crucial for the widespread adoption of THA, as patients can now receive surgical treatment in local facilities instead of overwhelming larger hospitals and straining medical resources. Moreover, the development of surgical robots with fully independent intellectual property rights holds immense value in overcoming the limitations of high-end medical equipment. This aligns with the objectives outlined in the 14th Five Year Plan for National Science and Technology Strategy.

Improved short-term outcomes for a novel, fluoroscopy-based robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty system compared to manual technique with fluoroscopic assistance

BACKGROUND

While robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) has been associated with improved accuracy of component placement, the perioperative and early postoperative outcomes of fluoroscopy-based RA-THA systems have yet to be elucidated.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort analysis included a consecutive series of patients who received manual, fluoroscopy-assisted THA (mTHA) and fluoroscopy-based RA-THA at a single institution. We compared rates of complications within 90 days of surgery, length of hospital stay (LOS), and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores.

RESULTS

No differences existed between groups with respect to demographic data or perioperative recovery protocols. The RA-THA cohort had a significantly greater proportion of outpatient surgeries compared to the mTHA cohort (37.4% vs. 3.8%; p < 0.001) and significantly lower LOS (26.0 vs. 39.5 h; p < 0.001). The RA-THA cohort had a smaller 90-day postoperative complication rate compared to the mTHA cohort (0.9% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.029). The RA-THA cohort had significantly lower patient-reported VAS pain scores at 2-week follow-up visits (2.5 vs. 3.3; p = 0.048), but no difference was seen after 6-week follow visits (2.5 vs. 2.8; p = 0.468).

CONCLUSION

Fluoroscopy-based RA-THA demonstrates low rates of postoperative complications, improved postoperative pain profiles, and shortened LOS when compared to manual, fluoroscopy-assisted THA.

Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty utilizing a fluoroscopy-guided system resulted in improved intra-operative efficiency relative to a computerized tomography-based platform

Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a computerized-tomography (CT) based workflow increases surgical time relative to traditional manual technique. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the intra-operative efficiencies of two robotic THA systems: a fluoroscopy-based platform (FL-RTHA) and a contemporary, CT-based (CT-RTHA) platform. A review of 107 consecutive FL-RTHA and 159 CT-RTHA primary, direct anterior approach (DAA) THA procedures was conducted. All cases were performed by one of two surgeons operating at the same institution, for a pre-operative diagnosis of osteoarthritis, avascular necrosis, or rheumatoid arthritis. Primary outcome variables included averages and consistencies (variances) for surgical times and operating room (OR) times. A secondary outcome was to quantify the duration of robot-active phases in the FL-RTHA workflow. The FL-RTHA cohort experienced shorter surgical times (38.71 min ± 7.00 vs. 75.33 min ± 11.38; p < 0.001) and OR times (101.35 min ± 12.22 vs. 156.74 min ± 17.79; p < 0.001) compared to the CT-RTHA cohort. Surgical times and OR times were both more consistent in the FL-RTHA cohort compared to the CT-RTHA cohort (p < 0.001). Patients who underwent DAA THA with the assistance of a fluoroscopy-based robotic system experienced shorter and more consistent surgical times and OR times compared to patients who underwent similar DAA THA procedures with a contemporary, CT-based robotic platform.

A review of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a successful surgical method for hip replacement but still poses challenges and risks. Robotic-assisted THA (rTHA) using new generation robotic systems has emerged to improve surgical precision and outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on rTHA, with a focus on its advantages, such as individualized preoperative planning, intraoperative assistance, and improved accuracy in implantation, especially in complex cases. Additionally, it aims to explore the disadvantages associated with the use of rTHA, including high costs, the learning curve, and prolonged operation time compared to manual THA (mTHA), which are critical drawbacks that require careful consideration and efforts for minimization. Some financial analyses suggest that rTHA may offer cost-effectiveness and reduced postoperative costs compared to mTHA. While technological advancements are expected to reduce technical complications, there are still debates surrounding long-term outcomes. Practical limitations, such as limited availability and accessibility, also warrant attention. Although the development of rTHA shows promise, it is still in its early stages, necessitating critical evaluation and further research to ensure optimal patient benefits.

Preliminary study of short-term outcomes and learning curves of robotic-assisted THA: comparison between closed platform robotic system and open platform robotic system

BACKGROUND

Both closed platform and open platform robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) have recently been recommended as a viable treatment option for achieving accurate positioning of components. Yet, limited studies paid attention to the differences between the closed platform robotic system and the open platform robotic system. Hence, this study aimed to investigate clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, complication rates and learning curve of two systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively included 62 patients (31 closed robotic system and 31 open robotic system) who underwent THA between February 2021 and January 2023. The demographics, operating time, cup positioning, complications and hip Harris score were evaluated. Learning curves of operation time was conducted using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.

RESULTS

There were no differences in surgical time (76.7 ± 12.1 min vs. 72.3 ± 14.8 min), estimated blood loss (223.2 ± 13.2 ml vs. 216.9 ± 17 ml) and Harris Hip score (HHS) between closed platform robotic system and the open platform robotic system. The closed robotic system and the open robotic system were associated with a learning curve of 9 cases and 7 cases for surgical time respectively, based on the satisfying rate of Lewinnek's safe zone outliers (1/31, 96.8%) and no occurrence of complication. Both robotic systems had significant reduction in overall surgical time, the duration of acetabulum registration, and estimated blood loss between learning phase and proficiency phase.

CONCLUSION

The authors suggest that the surgical outcomes and safe zone outlier rate of the open robotic-assisted THA were similar to those of the closed robotic-assisted THA. These two robotic-assisted are associated with comparable learning curves and both have the precise positioning of acetabular component. From learning phase to proficiency phase, the rate of positions within the safe zone differed only marginally (88.9-100% vs. 85.7-100%) based on a rather low number of patients. This is not a statistically significant difference. Therefore, we suggest that THA undergoing with the robotic-assisted system is the relatively useful way to achieve planned acetabular cup position so far.

Clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted and manual total hip arthroplasty in the same patient: A case report

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an effective treatment for advanced osteonecrosis of the femoral head, which can significantly relieve pain and improve patients' quality of life. Robotic-assisted THA enhances the accuracy and stability of THA surgery and achieves better clinical outcomes than manual THA.

CASE SUMMARY

We report the clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted THA and manual THA in the same patient with osteonecrosis of the femoral head. A 49-year-old male patient attended our hospital due to more than 3 years of pain in both hip joints. The left hip was treated with robotic-assisted THA. The patient underwent manual THA of the right hip 3 mo after robotic-assisted THA. We obtained postoperative radiograph parameters, Harris hip score and forgotten joint score of the patient 1 year after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Compared with manual THA, the patient's left hip felt better 1 year after robotic-assisted THA. Robotic-assisted THA resulted in a better Harris hip score and forgotten joint score than manual THA in the same patient with osteonecrosis of the femoral head.

Learning curve and short-term clinical outcomes of a new seven-axis robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty system: a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to determine the learning curve for a novel seven-axis robot-assisted (RA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) system and to explore whether it could provide superior short-term clinical and radiological outcomes compared with conventional surgery.

METHODS

In the present retrospective study, 90 patients who underwent RA-TKA were included in robot-assisted system (RAS) group and 90 patients who underwent conventional TKA were included in the conventional group. The duration of surgery and robot-related complications were recorded to evaluate the learning curve through cumulative sum and risk-adjusted cumulative sum methods. The demographic data, preoperative clinical data, preoperative imaging data, duration of surgery, alignment of the prosthesis, lower limb force line alignment, Knee Society score, 10-cm visual analog scale pain score and range of motion were compared between the RAS and conventional groups. In addition, the proficiency group was compared with the conventional group using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

RA-TKA was associated with a learning curve of 20 cases for the duration of surgery. There was no significant difference in indicators representing the accuracy of the prosthetic installation between the learning and proficiency phases in RA-TKA group patients. A total of 49 patients in the proficiency group were matched with 49 patients from the conventional group. The number of postoperative hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle, component femoral coronal angle (CFCA), component tibial coronal angle (CTCA), and sagittal tibial component angle (STCA) outliers in the proficiency phase was lower than that in the conventional group, while deviations of the HKA angle, CFCA, CTCA, and STCA in the proficiency phase were significantly lower than those in the conventional group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In summary, from the learning curve data, 20 cases are required for a surgeon using a novel seven-axis RA-TKA system to enter the proficiency phase. In the proficiency group, compared with the conventional group using propensity score matching, the RAS was found to be superior to the conventional group in prosthesis and lower limb alignment.

Does robotic-assisted surgery improve outcomes of total hip arthroplasty compared to manual technique? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an emerging technology that claims to position implants with very high accuracy. However, there is currently limited data in literature on whether this improved accuracy leads to better long-term clinical outcomes. This systematic review compares the outcomes of THA done with the help of robotic assistance (RA) to those done with conventional manual techniques (MTs).

METHODS

Four electronic databases were searched for eligible articles that directly compared robot-assisted THA to manual THA and had data on the radiological or clinical outcomes of both. Data on various outcome parameters were collected. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 17 articles were found eligible for inclusion, and 3600 cases were analysed. Mean operating time in the RA group was significantly longer than in the MT group. RA resulted in significantly more acetabular cups being placed inside Lewinnek's and Callanan's safe zones (p<0.001) and had significantly reduced limb length discrepancy compared with MT. There were no statistically significant differences in the two groups in terms of incidence of perioperative complications, need for revision surgery and long-term functional outcome.

CONCLUSION

RA leads to highly accurate implant placement and leads to significantly reduced limb length discrepancies. However, the authors do not recommend robot-assisted techniques for routine THAs due to lack of adequate long-term follow-up data, prolonged surgical times and no significant differences in the rate of complications and implant survivorship compared with conventional MTs.

The learning curve for a novel, fluoroscopy-based robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty system

BACKGROUND

Adoption of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) systems can improve the accuracy of acetabular cup placement, but no group has reported the learning curve of novel, fluoroscopy-based RA-THA systems.

METHODS

A learning-curve cumulative summation (LC-CUSUM) analysis was performed on a consecutive series of the first 100 patients who received fluoroscopy-based RA-THA by the study surgeon. Operative times and specific robotic timepoints were compared between learning and proficiency phases.

RESULTS

Implementation of fluoroscopy-based RA-THA was associated with a learning curve of 12 cases. A 6-min increase in operative time was seen during the learning phase compared to the proficiency phase (44.3 ± 4.4 vs. 38.0 ± 7.1 min; p < 0.001), with a 3-min longer robotic cup impaction sequence during the learning phase (7.8 ± 1.9 vs. 4.8 ± 1.3 min; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adoption of fluoroscopy-based RA-THA is associated with a brief learning curve of 12 cases, with the most significant improvements in surgical efficiency realised during acetabular cup placement.

Precise acetabular positioning, discrepancy in leg length, and hip offset using a new seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty system requires no learning curve: a retrospective study

Objective

The purpose of the present study was to determine the learning curve for a novel seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) system, and to explore whether it was able to provide greater accuracy in acetabular cup positioning, superior leg length discrepancy (LLD), and hip offset than conventional methods.

Methods

A total of 160 patients in which unilateral THA was performed in the second affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from July 2021 to September 2022 were studied. The first 80 patients underwent robot-assisted THA, while conventional THA was performed on the subsequent 80 by the same team of experienced surgeons. The learning curve for the RA-THA system was evaluated using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. The demographic data, preoperative clinical data, duration of surgery, postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) and postoperative radiographic data from patients that had conventional THA were compared.

Results

The 80 patients who underwent primary unilateral RA-THA comprised 42 males and 38 females and were followed up for 12 weeks. Using analysis by CUSUM, the learning curve of the RA-THA system could be divided into learning and proficiency phases, the former of which consisted of the first 17 cases. There was no significant difference between the learning and proficiency phases in terms of LLD, hip offset, or accuracy of acetabular prosthesis position in the RA-THA groups. The proportion of acetabular prostheses located in the Lewinnek safe zone was 90.5% in the proficiency group and 77.5% in the conventional group, respectively, a difference that was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The absolute error between target angle and postoperative measured angle of anteversion was statistically significant in the proficiency group and the conventional group((P < 0.05). Postoperative acetabular anteversion and LLD were 19.96 ± 5.68° and 6.00 (5.00) mm in the proficiency group, respectively, and 17.84 ± 6.81° and 8.09 (4.33) mm using conventional surgery, respectively (anteversion: P = 0.049; LLD: P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The surgical team required a learning curve of 17 cases using the RA-THA system to become proficient. There was no learning curve for other parameters, namely LLD, hip offset, or accuracy of acetabular prosthesis positioning. During the proficiency phase, the RA system was superior to conventional THA for control of leg length and accuracy of acetabular cup placement.

A comparison of radiological and clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted and conventional total hip arthroplasty: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) is superior to conventional total hip arthroplasty (CTHA) in terms of radiological and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Three databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase) were searched for articles published before 11 May 2021. The comparison outcomes of interest included radiological and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies involving 2845 hips that compared the radiological and clinical outcomes of RATHA and CTHA were included in this study. There was no significant difference between RATHA and CTHA in cup anteversion or complications. However, RATHA showed better outcomes in terms of leg-length discrepancy, stem alignment, cup inclination, the Lewinnek safe zone, Callanan safe zone, total complications, and intraoperative complications. Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty was inferior to CTHA in terms of operative time and dislocations (all p-values < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The radiological and clinical outcomes of RATHA were comparable and even better than those of CTHA, except for operative time and dislocation outcomes.

Comparison of Preoperative Computed Tomography and Intraoperative Estimation in Predicting the Version of a Single-Wedge Femoral Stem

Objective

Early prediction of stem version aids in optimization of combined version during total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to analyze the discrepancy between stem version and native femoral version measured by different methods, and to explore which method can better predict the stem version.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 26 patients (39 hips) treated with robot‐assisted THA in our hospital between September 2019 and December 2019. A straight, single‐wedge, cementless stem (Accolade II) was used in all cases. Preoperative femoral version was measured at three levels on computerized tomography (CT) scan from the top to the middle level of femoral neck (Level 1 to Level 3). During THA, the version on cutting surface was measured prior to femoral broaching based on two reference lines: mid‐cortical line and T line (trochanteric fossa to the middle of medial cortex). After femoral broaching, stem version was measured based on the femoral neck trial using Mako system (Stryker). In the statistical analysis, the difference and absolute discrepancy between stem version and femoral version measured with various methods were examined using paired t‐test, and the relationship between stem version and various femoral versions were examined using correlation analysis.

Results

Mean femoral neck version (Level 1) was 9.5° ± 2.6° (range, −16.8°‐42.5°), while mean stem version measured by Mako system was 19.9° ± 2.0° (range, −8.0°‐49.0°). Femoral version measured with each method showed a moderate correlation with stem version (p < 0.05). There was a significant difference between stem version and femoral version except at Level 3, with a mean difference of 0.8° ± 13.6° (p = 0.729). With regard to the intraoperative estimation, stem version significantly increased compared to the value based on mid‐cortical line, with a mean difference of 8.4° ± 13.1° (p < 0.001). However, the mean value of stem version was a little smaller than that of femoral version measured by reference to T line, but without statistical significance (p = 0.156). No postoperative dislocations occurred during the study period. No revision was required for any component.

Conclusions

The middle level of femoral neck on CT scan and T line on cutting surface are better references to measure femoral version for predicting postoperative stem version. However, the relationship between stem version and predictive value was flexible. Therefore, further three‐dimensional studies of postoperative CT are needed to validate the press‐fit fixation and rotational freedom of the single‐wedge stem.

Robotic-assisted versus manual total hip arthroplasty in obese patients: a retrospective case-control study

Aims

The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of acetabular cup positioning in the obese patients when using robotic-assisted technology during total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods

Data were retrospectively collected from patients who underwent primary (THA) with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 28 kg/m² and ≥ 1 year of follow-up between January 2018 and December 2019. Their demographics, diagnosis, acetabular cup positioning, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) at the final follow-up were recorded for analysis.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in height, weight, BMI, ASA score, or preoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS). Also, there was no difference in inclination angle between the two groups (R-THA: 41.29° ± 3.04°; manual THA (M-THA): 40.47° ± 5.46°; P = 0.312). However, the mean anteversion angle was greater in the R-THA group (20.71° ± 1.98° vs. 19.08° ± 4.04°; P < 0.001). Compared to M-THA, R-THA more frequently achieved an acetabular cup angle within 5° of the target (anteversion, 98.1% vs. 78.1% P = 0.001; inclination, 88.5% vs. 53.1%, P < 0.001). The R-THA group was more advantageous in restoring the hip center of rotation (COR) and leg length difference (LLD). There was no statistical difference in postoperative HHS (P = 0.404) or FJS (P = 0.497) between the two groups.

Conclusions

Compared to manual technique, robotic-assisted technique provided more precise acetabular cup positioning and better leg length restoration for obese patients. The robotic-assisted technique was more advantageous in recovering the center of rotation position and achieved a higher proportion of the acetabular cup placed in the target safety zone. Further studies are needed to confirm the clinical outcomes of surgeries in obese patients using robotic-assisted technology.

A Newly Designed "SkyWalker" Robot Applied in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study for Femoral Rotational Alignment Restoration

Objective

This study explored whether robotic arm‐assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) has the advantage of restoring femoral rotational alignment compared to conventional total knee arthroplasty (COTKA).

Methods

Sixty patients (45 women and 15 men) attending our department from May 2019 to December 2020 were selected and divided into two groups, with 30 patients in each group, according to whether they underwent COTKA or RATKA. Femoral rotational alignment results, such as, posterior condylar angle (PCA), patella transverse axis‐femoral transepicondylar axis angle (PFA), radiological findings, such as, hip‐knee‐ankle angle (HKA), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), and operative data (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, tourniquet time, and length of stay (LOS), and clinical outcomes, such as maximum knee flexion angle (MKFA), Knee Society Score (KSS), and Western Ontario Mac Master University Index Score (WOMAC) were compared within and between the two groups.

Results

PCA and PFA in the RATKA group were (0.6 ± 0.3)° and (0.9 ± 0.3)°, respectively, which were smaller than (1.5 ± 2.0)° and (3.1 ± 1.1)° in the COTKA group (P < 0.05), and were closer to 0°; the differences in HKA, LDFA, and MPTA were not statistically significant. With the exception of the LDFA, the HKA, MPTA, PCA, and PFA improved in both groups after surgery (P < 0.05). The blood loss and the LOS of RATKA group were 192.3 ± 23.1 mL and 8.2 ± 1.4 days, which were less than 203.7 ± 29.8 mL and 9.3 ± 1.1 days of the COTKA group, but the operation time showed no statistically significant difference, and the tourniquet time was longer (P < 0.05). The MKFA in the RATKA group was (123.0 ± 3.7)°, which was greater than (116.3 ± 4.6)° in the COTKA group (P < 0.05). In terms of scores, the postoperative results were better than the preoperative results in both groups (P < 0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups.

Conclusion

The accuracy of femoral rotational alignment reconstructed achieved by RATKA is significantly better than that of COTKA and is more conducive to the recovery of knee flexion function after surgery; although RATKA reduces intraoperative blood loss and postoperative LOS, the short‐term clinical efficacy comparison has not yet demonstrated the advantages of robotic technology, and a more optimized design is needed to improve the efficiency of RATKA surgery.

Total Hip Arthroplasty with Robotic Arm Assistance for Precise Cup Positioning: A Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether more precise cup positioning can be achieved with robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) as compared to conventional THA.

METHODS

In this study, between July 2019 and May 2021, 93 patients aged 23-75 years with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) and adult developmental dysplasia of hip who underwent first hip surgery were included in the study. They were randomly assigned to either the robotic-assisted THA group (n = 45) or the conventional THA group (n = 48). After the operation, all patients were given routine rapid rehabilitation guidance. The duration of operation was recorded to estimate the learning curve through cumulative summation analysis. We compared the demographics, duration of operation, cup positioning, leg length discrepancy, hip offset, and Harris Hip Score between robot-assisted THA and manual THA. Precision in the positioning of the acetabular prosthesis using the MAKO system was also compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The mean duration of operation for the robot-assisted THA group was 91.37 ± 17.34 min (range: 63 to 135 min), which was significantly higher than that for the conventional THA group. When the number of procedures was increased to 13, the duration of operation in the robot-assisted group decreased significantly and gradually became stable. In terms of duration of operation, robot-assisted THA was associated with a learning curve of 13 cases. The mean amount of bleeding in the robot-assisted THA group was not significantly different from that in conventional THA group (328 ± 210 ml vs 315 ± 205 ml) (p = 0.741). There was no significant difference in the proportion of prostheses located within Lewinnek's safe zone between robot-assisted THA group and conventional THA group (69.81% vs 64.41%). The leg length discrepancy (LLD) was significantly smaller in the robot-assisted THA group than in the conventional THA group (p < 0.001), but both were within acceptable limits (10 mm). The inclination and anteversion angles of the acetabular prosthesis planned before operations were correlated with the actual measurement (r = 0.857 p < 0.001, r = 0.830, p < 0.001). After surgery, none of the patients experienced hip dislocation, aseptic loosening, or periprosthetic infection during the 3 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The proportion of acetabular prostheses in the Lewinnek's safety zone was higher and the extent of LLD was significantly lower in the robot-assisted THA group, as compared to the same metrics in the conventional THA group. The MAKO robot improved the accuracy of implant placement in THA.

[Meta-analysis of leg length discrepancy after robot-assisted and traditional total hip arthroplasty]

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the difference in leg length discrepancy (LLD) between robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) and traditional THA.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM databases were searched by computer to collect cohort studies of robot-assisted and traditional THAs from inception to August 11th, 2021. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and evaluated the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 10 high-quality cohort studies were included. The results of Meta-analysis showed that compared with traditional THA, LLD after robot-assisted THA was smaller [ MD=-1.64, 95% CI (-2.25, -1.04), P<0.001], Harris scores at 3 and 12 months after operation were higher [ MD=1.50, 95% CI (0.44, 2.57), P=0.006; MD=7.60, 95% CI (2.51, 12.68), P=0.003]. However, the operative time was longer [ MD=8.36, 95% CI (4.56, 12.17), P<0.000 1], and the postoperative acetabular anteversion angle was larger [ MD=1.91, 95% CI (1.43, 2.40), P<0.001]. There was no significant difference in Harris score at 6 months, amnesia index (Forgotten joint score, FJS), postoperative acetabular abduction angle, and incidence of complication between the two groups ( P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted THA is superior to traditional THA in postoperative LLD.

Clinical and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional total hip arthroplasty: a systematic overview of meta-analyses

Robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA), in comparison to conventional THA, improves radiographic outcomes, but it remains unclear whether it alters complication rates, clinical and functional outcomes, and implant survival.

The purpose of this systematic overview was to summarize the findings of the most recent meta-analyses that compare clinical and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional THA.

Two readers independently conducted an electronic literature search, screening and data extraction from five electronic databases. Inclusion criteria were: meta-analyses evaluating robot-assisted versus conventional THA in terms of radiographic outcomes, clinical and functional scores, and complications and revision rates. The literature search returned 67 records, of which 14 were duplicates and 49 were excluded, leaving three meta-analyses published within the past two years for data extraction and analysis.

The present overview of meta-analyses suggests that, compared to conventional THA (n = 3011), robot-assisted THA (n = 1813) improves component placement and reduces intraoperative complications. The overview also affirms that robot-assisted THA could extend surgery by 20 minutes, and increases risks of postoperative heterotopic ossification, dislocation, and revision. None of the meta-analyses found significant differences in clinical or functional scores between robot-assisted and conventional THA.

Future studies and reviews should make a clear distinction between active and semi-active robotic assistance, address technology matureness, and describe the experience of surgeons with robotic assistance.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:1157-1165. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200121

[Robot-assisted joint arthroplasty-An emerging technology of the present and the future]

Objective

To review and evaluate the research progress of the robot-assisted joint arthroplasty.

Methods

The domestic and foreign related research literature on robot-assisted joint arthroplasty was extensively consulted. The advantages, disadvantages, effectiveness, and future prospects were mainly reviewed and summarized.

Results

The widely recognized advantages of robot-assisted joint arthroplasty are digital and intelligent preoperative planning, accurate intraoperative prosthesis implantation, and quantitative soft tissue balance, as well as good postoperative imaging prosthesis position and alignment. However, the advantages of effectiveness are still controversial. The main disadvantages of robot-assisted joint arthroplasty are the high price of the robot system, the prolonged operation time, and the increased radioactive damage of the imaging-dependent system.

Conclusion

Compared to traditional arthroplasty, robot-assisted joint arthroplasty can improve the accuracy of the prosthesis position and assist in the quantitative assessment of soft tissue tension, and the repeatability rate is high. In the future, further research is needed to evaluate the clinical function and survival rate of the prosthesis, as well as to optimize the robot system.

[Application of Mako robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty in developmental dysplasia of the hip]

Objective

To evaluate the early effectiveness and summarize the initial application experiences of Mako robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in adults.

Methods

Between August 2018 and January 2020, 55 cases of DDH (75 hips) were treated with Mako robot-assisted THA. There were 10 males and 45 females with an average age of 51 years (range, 30-73 years). There were 35 cases of unilateral hip and 20 cases of bilateral hips. The DDH was classified as Crowe type Ⅰin 29 hips, type Ⅱ in 20 hips, type Ⅲ in 6 hips, and type Ⅳ in 20 hips. The modified Harris score was 54.8±16.0, the hip joint range of motion was 90° (80°, 100°), and the leg length discrepancy (LLD) was 22.0 (10.5, 47.0) mm. The preoperative surgical plan was made in the robot system based on the CT data. The reaming and installation of the acetabular cup were completed with the assistance of the robot system. The distance between the rotation center of the hip joint and the teardrop (horizontal distance, vertical distance), inclination angle, and anteversion angle were measured on the pelvic X-ray film to evaluate the position of the acetabular prosthesis. The above indicators were compared with preoperative planning to evaluate the accuracy of robotic-assisted surgery. The modified Harris score, the range of motion, and the LLD were used to evaluate the early effectiveness.

Results

The 75 hips of THAs were completed with the assistance of Mako robots. There was no significant difference in the acetabular inclination angle, the horizontal distance and the vertical distance of the rotation center between the preoperative planning and the postoperative measurement values ( P>0.05); the acetabular anteversion angle was significantly smaller than the postoperative measurement value ( t=-2.482, P=0.015). Four hips located beyond the Lewinnek safety zone, and 71 hips located within the Lewinnek safety zone. All patients followed up 6-24 months (mean, 13 months). All incisions healed by first intention. At last follow-up, the modified Harris score was 85.5±11.2, the hip joint range of motion was 120° (110°, 120°), and the LLD was 3.8 (2.0, 8.1) mm; all improved significantly compared with preoperative ones ( P<0.05). Except for one nerve injury case, there was no other complication.

Conclusion

Mako robot-assisted THA is a safe and effective method for adult DDH, which can optimize the acetabular cup positioning, hip function, and leg length, but the long-term effectiveness needs to be confirmed by further studies.

Comparing early and mid-term outcomes between robotic-arm assisted and manual total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review

The projected increase in utilization rates of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has created an emphasis on novel technologies that can aid providers in maintaining historically positive outcomes. Widespread utilization of robotic assisted THA (RA-THA) is contingent upon achieving favorable outcomes compared to its traditional manual counterpart (mTHA). Therefore, the purpose of our systematic review was to compare RA-THA and mTHA in terms of the following: (1) functional outcomes and (2) complication rates. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched for articles published October 1994 and May 2021 comparing functional outcomes and complication rates between RA-THA and mTHA cohorts. When three or more studies evaluated certain PROMs and complications, a pooled analysis utilizing Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models was conducted utilizing data from final follow-up. Our final analysis included 18 studies which reported on a total of 2811 patients [RA-THA: n = 1194 (42.48%); mTHA: n = 1617 (57.52%)]. No significant differences were demonstrated for a majority of pooled analyses and when segregating by robotic system. Only WOMAC scores were significantly lower among RA-THA patients (p = 0.0006). For outcomes without sufficient data for a pooled analysis, there were no significant differences reported among included studies. The growing utilization of RA-THA motivates comparisons to its manual counterpart. Collectively, we found comparable functional outcomes and complication profiles between RA-THA and mTHA cohorts. More randomized controlled trials of higher quality and larger sample sizes are necessary to further strengthen these findings.

Robotic arm-assisted versus manual total hip arthroplasty : a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The aims of this systematic review were to assess the learning curve of semi-active robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty (rTHA), and to compare the accuracy, patient-reported functional outcomes, complications, and survivorship between rTHA and manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA).

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar were performed in April 2020 in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. Search terms included "robotic", "hip", and "arthroplasty". The criteria for inclusion were published clinical research articles reporting the learning curve for rTHA (robotic arm-assisted only) and those comparing the implantation accuracy, functional outcomes, survivorship, or complications with mTHA.

RESULTS

There were 501 articles initially identified from databases and references. Following full text screening, 17 articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria were included. Four studies reported the learning curve of rTHA, 13 studies reported on implant positioning, five on functional outcomes, ten on complications, and four on survivorship. The meta-analysis showed a significantly greater number of cases of acetabular component placement in the safe zone compared with the mTHA group (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.10 to 7.94; p < 0.001) and that rTHA resulted in a significantly better Harris Hip Score compared to mTHA in the short- to mid-term follow-up (95% CI 0.46 to 5.64; p = 0.020). However, there was no difference in infection rates, dislocation rates, overall complication rates, and survival rates at short-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The learning curve of rTHA was between 12 and 35 cases, which was dependent on the assessment goal, such as operating time, accuracy, and team working. Robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty was associated with improved accuracy of component positioning and functional outcome, however no difference in complication rates or survival were observed at short- to mid-term follow-up. Overall, there remains an absence of high-quality level I evidence and cost analysis comparing rTHA and mTHA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1009-1020.

Robotics in total hip arthroplasty: a review of the evolution, application and evidence base

Robotic systems used in orthopaedics have evolved from active systems to semi-active systems.

Early active systems were associated with significant technical and surgical complications, which limited their clinical use.

The new semi-active system Mako has demonstrated promise in overcoming these limitations, with positive early outcomes.

There remains a paucity of data regarding long-term outcomes associated with newer systems such as Mako and TSolution One, which will be important in assessing the applicability of these systems.

Given the already high satisfaction rate of manual THA, further high-quality comparative studies are required utilizing outcome scores that are not limited by high ceiling effects to assess whether robotic systems justify their additional expense.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:866-873. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.200037

Current concepts in robotic total hip arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Total hip replacement provides mostly fair functional and clinical results. Many factors play an essential role in hip stability and long-term outcomes. Surgical positioning remains fundamental for obtaining accurate implant fit and prevent hip dislocation or impingement. Different categories of robotic assistance have been established throughout the previous years and all of the technologies target accuracy and reliability to reduce complications, and enhance clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An overview is proposed over the principles of robotic assistance in hip arthroplasty surgery. Accuracy, reliability, management of the bone stock, clinical outcomes, constraints and limits of this technology are reported, based on recent literature.

RESULTS

Potential advantages regarding pre-operative planning accuracy, cup positioning, maintenance of the center of rotation, preservation of an adequate bone stock nay clinical short- and mid-term outcomes are balanced with some reported disadvantages and limits like hip anatomical specificity, cost-effectiveness, engineering dependence.

DISCUSSION

The use of robotic-assisted THA presents clear and evident benefits related to accurate implant positioning and maintenance of a minimal bone while allowing. For some authors, an early improvement in functional results and patient's recovery. This technology demonstrated a shorter surgical time and a short learning curve required to optimize its use and this technology presents promising outcomes and results and potential use in routine clinical application but its limitation of use is still present especially the cost of the robot, the need for the presence of an engineer during the surgery, its availability of use in all hospitals as well as the difficulty presented in dysplastic or dysmorphic hip joints.