Does acetabular robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty with femoral navigation improve clinical outcomes at 1-year post-operative? A case-matched propensity score study comparing 98 robotic-assisted versus 98 manual implantation hip arthroplasties

What is the clinical detection threshold for lower limb length inequality? In silico study of reproducibility and optimization using a centimeter graduated support

INTRODUCTION

The threshold of a Leg Length Discrepancy (LLD) by clinical examination on a sheet or centimeter paper (CP) is not known precisely whether or not it concerns limbs equipped with a hip prosthesis. We therefore conducted a prospective in silico study in order to: (1) determine the reproducibility and sensitivity of the clinical measurement of the LLD in different ideal and "degraded" clinical situations, (2) determine the threshold from which the human eye is capable of detecting a length inequality in clinic, (3) to determine whether the use of a graduated support (centimeter paper) improves the clinical measurement threshold.

HYPOTHESIS

Our hypothesis was that clinical measurement on a centimeter support would improve clinical measurement accuracy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was an in silico study, the experiment was conducted on a mannequin. Different inequalities were created on a mannequin and photographed with a total of 30 inequalities from -22 to +22 mm on sheet or centimeter paper (CP). This was a multicenter study, with 40 different readers. We asked the readers to make a second measurement one month later. We evaluated the inter- and intra-observer reproducibility. The error rate at the threshold of 3 mm and 5 mm were calculated versus the gold standard. Finally, we determined at which thresholds respectively 75% and 95% of the measurements were correct.

RESULTS

A total of 4140 measurements were performed and compared to the gold standard. With a threshold of 75% accurate measurement, the LLD detection threshold was 2.8 mm on centimeter paper and 4.5 mm on sheet. With a threshold of 95% accurate measurement, the LLD detection threshold was 3.4 mm on centimeter paper and 5.2 mm on sheet. Interobserver agreement (assessed overall on the 40 observers by Krippendorff's generalized Kappa) was 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI95%) = 0.79 to 0.92) on CP and 0.71 (CI95% = 0.63 to 0.79) on sheet. Intra-observer agreement assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient among observers who made 2 measurements had a median value (IQR) of 0.96 (0.94 to 0.99) on CP and 0.90 (0.83 to 0.94) on sheet.

DISCUSSION

The clinical detection threshold on sheet at the patient's bed appears close to 5 mm. A more precise measurement is possible with graduated centimeter paper. A study in daily practice on patients in real situations would confirm our results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; prospective diagnostic comparative in Silico study.

Robotic Arm-Assisted System Improved Accuracy of Cup Position and Orientation in Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty for Dysplastic Hips: A Comparison Among Groups With Manual Placement, Computed Tomography-Based Navigation, and Robotic Surgery

Background

Accurate cup placement in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with dysplasia is challenging due to the distinctive bone deformities. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of cup placement position and orientation across robotic arm-assisted systems (R-THA), computed tomography-based navigation (N-THA), and manual procedure (M-THA) in THA for osteoarthritis secondary to dysplasia.

Methods

A total of 167 patients (197 hips), including 88 R-THAs, 45 N-THAs, and 46 M-THAs, were analyzed. Propensity score matching was performed to align the patient backgrounds. Horizontal and vertical centers of rotation were measured for cup position, whereas radiographic inclination and anteversion were measured for cup orientation. The proportion of cases with cup placement within 3 mm and 5° from the target was compared.

Results

R-THA had a significantly higher percentage of cup placement within 3 mm of the target compared to N-THA (78% vs 49%; P = .0041) and M-THA (78% vs 53%; P = .013). Similarly, R-THA was significantly more successful in placing the cup within 5° of the target compared to N-THA (84% vs 58%; P = .0049) and M-THA (91% vs 20%; P < .0001). Moreover, N-THA was significantly better at placing the cup within 5° of the target compared to M-THA (62% vs 14%; P < .0001), whereas there was no significant difference in the percentage of cup placement within 3 mm of the target (51% vs 51%; P = 1.0).

Conclusions

Robotic arm-assisted system and computed tomography-based navigation improved accuracy in cup orientation compared to the manual procedure. Additionally, the robotic arm-assisted system further improved cup position accuracy.

Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip

PURPOSES

Due to the morphological diversity of deformities, technical difficulties, improperly designed components, and so on, THA remains a challenging task in dysplastic hips, especially in highly dislocated hips. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted THA in patients with DDH through a large cohort study, including the precision of acetabular cup positioning, indicators of inflammatory response, indicators of muscle damage, and complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients with DDH who underwent THA in our prospectively constructed joint registry between August 2018 and August 2022. Finally, 147 manual THAs and 147 robotic-assisted THAs were included in the final analysis. Patient demographics, indicators of inflammation, indicators of muscle damage, operative time, Harris hip scores (HHS), and forgotten joint score (FJS) were recorded for analysis. The precision of the positioning of the acetabular component was assessed with plain radiographs.

RESULTS

In the Crowe II/III groups, the reconstructed center of rotation (COR) in the robotic-assisted group was closer to the anatomical COR with less variation than the manual group (absolute horizontal distances of COR 3.5 ± 2.8 vs. 5.4 ± 4.9 mm, p < 0.05; absolute vertical distances of COR 6.4 ± 4.1 vs. 11.7 ± 8.2 mm, p = 0.001). For all Crowe subtypes, the robotic-assisted THA significantly increased the proportion of acetabular cups located in the safety zone within 5° (all p < 0.05). Interleukin-6 and creatine kinase levels were slightly lower and significantly different in the robotic-assisted group at three days postoperatively (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the manual technique, the robot-assisted technique improved the precision and reproducibility of acetabular component positioning, particularly in DDH patients with Crowe types II/III. The robotic-assisted technique did not increase operative time, bleeding, complications, or revision rates, and had a slighter early inflammatory response and muscle damage.

Patient-reported outcome differences for navigated and robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty frequently do not achieve clinically important differences: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) using computer-assisted navigation (N-THA) and robot-assisted surgery (RA-THA) has been increasingly adopted to improve implant positioning and offset/leg-length restoration. Whether clinically meaningful differences in patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) compared to conventional THA (C-THA) are achieved with intraoperative technology has not been established. This systematic review aimed to assess whether published relative PROM improvements with technology use in THA achieved minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs).

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE/Cochrane Library were systematically reviewed for studies comparing PROMs for primary N-THA or RA-THA with C-THA as the control group. Relative improvement differences between groups were compared to established MCID values. Reported clinical and radiographic differences were assessed. Review of N-THA and RA-THA literature yielded 6 (n = 2580) and 10 (n = 2786) studies, respectively, for analyses.

RESULTS

Statistically significant improvements in postoperative PROM scores were reported in 2/6 (33.3%) studies comparing N-THA with C-THA, though only 1 (16.7%) reported clinically significant relative improvements. Statistically significant improvements in postoperative PROMs were reported in 6/10 (60.0%) studies comparing RA-THA and C-THA, though none reported clinically significant relative improvements. Improved radiographic outcomes for N-THA and RA-THA were reported in 83.3% and 70.0% of studies, respectively. Only 1 study reported a significant improvement in revision rates with RA-THA as compared to C-THA.

CONCLUSIONS

Reported PROM scores in studies comparing N-THA or RA-THA to C-THA often do not achieve clinically significant relative improvements. Future studies reporting PROMs should be interpreted in the context of validated MCID values to accurately establish the clinical impact of intraoperative technology.

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.