Robotic-assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty Research Articles

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.

Stem anteversion is not affected by proximal femur geometry in robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty

BackgroundIn the present study, the surgeon aimed to align the stem at 5° to 25° in anteversion. The robotic technology was used to measure stem anteversion with respect to proximal femur anteversion at different levels down the femur.MethodsA total of 102 consecutive patients underwent robotic-arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RTHA). 3D CT-based preoperative planning was performed to determine femoral neck version (FNV), posterior cortex anteversion (PCA), anterior cortex anteversion (ACA), and femoral metaphyseal axis anteversion (MAA) at 3 different levels: D (10 mm above lesser trochanter), E (the midpoint of the planned neck resection line) and F (head-neck junction). The robotic system was used to define and measure stem anteversion during surgery.ResultsMean FNV was 6.6° (SD: 8.8°) and the mean MAA was consistently significantly higher than FNV, growing progressively from proximal to distal. Mean SV was 16.4° (SD: 4.7°). There was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.16) between SV and MAA at the most distal measured level. In 96.1% cases, the stem was positioned inside the 5°–25° anteversion range.ConclusionsFemoral anteversion progressively increased from neck to proximal metaphysis. Aligning the stem close to femoral anteversion 10 mm above the lesser trochanter often led to the desired component anteversion.

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 From Converting From Fluoroscopic to Robotic-Assisted Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) provides an alternative to fluoroscopic guidance, thus reducing radiation exposure for orthopaedic surgeons. This study was performed to assess the learning curve associated with the adoption of RA-THA using the direct anterior approach (DAA) with regard to surgical time, use of fluoroscopy, and implant placement. In addition, we compared complication rates and patient-reported outcome scores between both cohorts. A case report of an RA-THA is also presented. This was a retrospective, non-randomized evaluation of the learning curve by assessing surgical time on a consecutive series of 89 DAA cases performed by a single surgeon. There were 53 cases that had manual THA with fluoroscopy and 36 cases with RA-THA. All cases had an acetabular component placement target of 40° inclination and 20° anteversion. An independent reviewer blinded to surgical technique used the Widmer method to measure acetabular inclination and version. Patient demographics were similar for both groups. The mean surgical time for the manual fluoroscopic group was 88 ± 21 minutes and 101 ± 14 minutes for the RA-THA group. After 15 RA-THA cases, surgical time reached time neutral compared to the manual fluoroscopic group. The first 17 RA-THA cases utilized fluoroscopy to verify implant position until the surgeon became comfortable with the accuracy of the RA-THA system. After case 17, fluoroscopy was abandoned in all subsequent RA-THA cases. The mean radiation dose delivered to the surgical field was 5.61 ± 5.71 mGy. Manual THA with fluoroscopy resulted in a mean acetabular inclination of 41.3 ± 4.4° and a mean anteversion of 22.4 ± 3.0°. The RA-THA resulted in a mean acetabular inclination of 42.0 ± 4.2° and a mean anteversion of 22.3 ± 3.9°. There was no noted change in RA-THA placement accuracy after case 17, when fluoroscopy was eliminated from the surgical workflow. There were no statistical differences between the manual fluoroscopic and robotic-assisted groups with respect to complications and clinical PROM outcomes. The DAA THA can be performed with RA-THA and achieve comparable acetabular placement without fluoroscopy. Surgical time was higher for the RA-THA group during the learning curve, but then decreased and was consistent with the manual fluoroscopic group after 15 cases.

Using preoperative planning software to assess the effect of head length on prosthetic range of motion in a high-risk population: a three-dimensional modeling study.

Concurrent use of minus heads with tapered stems in total hip arthroplasty (THA) decreases the prosthetic range of motion (pROM). Three-dimensional preoperative templating can simulate the location of the impingement by taking the hip through a virtual pROM. This enables surgeons to simulate how modifying the type of implant, orientation, and position influences impingement. We hypothesized that CT-based modeling would result in a decrease in the pROM, thereby increasing the risk of impingement when minus heads are used. Forty-three patients who underwent robotic-assisted primary THAs were included. Prosthetic head diameter (32/36-mm) and head length (minus/zero/plus) were the predictors. Maximum external rotation at full hip extension and internal rotation at 90° and 100° of flexion prior to prosthetic impingement were the outcome variables. A CT-based preoperative planning software was used for pROM estimation and impingement detection. Significant decreases in pROM were found for both head diameters as the head length decreased and was more pronounced in external rotation during full hip extension (changes of 2.8-3.4° for the 32-mm head and 1.6-2.8° for the 36-mm head (p = 0.00011)). The magnitude of loss in pROM when using a minus head was larger than the gain provided by a plus head in tapered stems (p < 0.0001). Head length affects the offset and pROM. When the use of minus heads or smaller heads is indicated, 3D preoperative templating for assessing postoperative pROM and impingement provides surgeons with options to consider alternate surgical plans offering additional assurance and protection from dislocation.

A commentary on "a new designed full process coverage robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: a multicentre randomized clinical trial".

A commentary on "a new designed full process coverage robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: a multicentre randomized clinical trial".

A commentary on'A new designed full process coverage robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: A multicenter randomized clinical trial'.

A commentary on'A new designed full process coverage robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: A multicenter randomized clinical trial'.

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

BacgroundThe aim of this study was to assess the learning curve of a novel seven-axis robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RaTHA) system.MethodsA 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.ResultsThe 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).ConclusionsThis 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 registrationNumber: ChiCTR2200061630, Date: 29/06/2022.

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

BackgroundRobotic 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. MethodsData 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+. ResultsThe 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). ConclusionsHigh 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.

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

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). 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. 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. 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.

Length of Stay and Discharge Disposition After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Large Multicenter Propensity Matched Comparison of Robotic-Assisted and Manual Techniques

BackgroundRobotic-arm assistance continues to gain popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for its potential to improve component placement accuracy and patient outcomes. Nonetheless, there is limited data on the impact of robotic-assisted THA (RA-THA) on hospital length of stay (LOS) and discharge location. This study thus aimed to compare LOS, discharge location, and readmission rate for propensity-matched cohorts of RA-THA versus manual THA (M-THA). MethodsA retrospective review of a multi-hospital database was performed to identify patients who underwent THA between January 2016 and December 2021 from surgeons who performed both RA-THA and M-THA at 77 geographically diverse hospitals. The RA-THA and M-THA cohorts were 1-to-1 matched based on patient sex, age, and body mass index, resulting in 8,536 patients per cohort. Insurance type, LOS, same-day discharge, discharge disposition, and 90-day all-cause readmission rate were compared using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests. ResultsAverage LOS was significantly shorter for RA-THA patients (1.39 ± 0.85 days) than for M-THA patients (1.48 ± 0.91 days, P < .001). Compared to 5.6% of M-THA patients, 5.3% of RA-THA patients underwent same-day discharge (P = .38). There were statistically significant differences in discharge disposition between cohorts, with more RA-THA cases discharged home without home healthcare compared to M-THA (47.9 versus 45.5%, P = .001) and fewer RA-THA cases discharged to a skilled nursing facility compared to M-THA (5.6 versus 6.9%, P = .001). The 90-day all-cause readmission rate for RA-THA cases was 3.0%, compared to 3.4% for M-THA cases (P = .26). ConclusionsCompared to M-THA, RA-THA had a shorter average LOS, a similar percentage of patients with same-day discharge, fewer patients who had skilled nursing facility discharge, and a similar all-cause 90-day readmission rate. These results may be of interest to surgeons participating in bundled payment programs and engaging in cost savings.

A new designed full process coverage robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty: a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

To compare the effect of a new complete robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) with that of the manual total hip arthroplasty (MTHA) and to verify the accuracy and safety of the former. Overall, 148 patients were enroled from 3 March 2021 to 28 December 2021 in this study and classified into RA-THA ( n =74 patients) and MTHA ( n =74 patients) groups. The sex, age, operative side, BMI, diagnosis, other basic information, operative time, acetabular prosthesis anteversion and inclination, femoral prosthesis anteversion and angulation, femoral prosthesis filling rate, leg length discrepancy (LLD), Harris hip score, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score of the two groups were compared. No significant differences were observed in the two groups regarding sex, age, operative side, BMI, diagnosis, Harris hip score, VAS score, acetabular inclination, acetabular prosthesis anteversion, femoral prosthesis anteversion, combined anteversion, and femoral prosthesis filling rate ( P >0.05). The operative time was significantly longer in the RA-THA group than in the MTHA group (106.71±25.22 min vs. 79.42±16.16 min; t=7.30, P <0.05). The femoral angulation (1.78°±0.64°) and LLD (2.87±1.55mm) in the RA-THA group were significantly lesser than those in the MTHA group (2.22°±1.11° and 5.81±6.27mm, respectively; t=-2.95 and t=-3.88, P <0.05). The complete RA-THA has some advantages over the traditional procedure in restoring the lower limb length and controlling the femoral prosthesis angulation. Thus, this study verifies the accuracy and safety of the robot-assisted system.

Use of a fluoroscopy-based robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty system produced greater improvements in patient-reported outcomes at one year compared to manual, fluoroscopic-assisted technique

IntroductionThe adoption of new technology should be supported by improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROMs). The purpose of this study was to assess the one-year PROMs of patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a novel, fluoroscopy-based, robotic-assisted (RA-THA) system when compared to a manual, fluoroscopic-assisted technique (mTHA).Materials and methodsA review of 91 consecutive mTHA and 85 consecutive RA-THA via a direct anterior approach was conducted. All cases were performed by the same surgeon at the same institution, for a pre-operative diagnosis of osteoarthritis, avascular necrosis, or rheumatoid arthritis. Outcomes included one-year Veterans RAND-12 (VR-12) Physical/Mental, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome (HOOS) Pain/Physical Function/Joint Replacement, and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity scores, as well as the difference between pre-operative and one-year post-operative PROMs.ResultsPatients in the RA-THA cohort had lower pre-operative HOOS-JR scores compared to patients in the mTHA cohort (37.0 vs. 43.1; p = 0.031). Cohorts experienced similar one-year post-operative VR-12, HOOS, and UCLA Activity scores. Patients in the RA-THA cohort experienced greater improvements across all pre- and post-operative HOOS scores compared to patients in the mTHA cohort: Pain (+ 54.7 vs. +42.1; p = 0.009), Physical Function (-41.6 vs. -28.7; p = 0.007), and Joint Replacement (+ 46.6 vs. +33.0; p = 0.002). These differences exceeded minimum clinically important difference (MCID).ConclusionsBoth manual and robotic cohorts experienced benefit from THA at one-year post-operative. Importantly, the use of a novel, fluoroscopy-based robotic assistance system for primary THA resulted in greater improvements in PROMs at one-year relative to manual technique.

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

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. 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. 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). 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.

Robotics and Navigation Do Not Affect the Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis.

The use of computer navigation or robotic assistance during primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has yielded numerous benefits due to more accurate component positioning. The utilization of these tools is generally associated with longer operative times and also necessitates additional surgical equipment and personnel in the operating room. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of technology assistance on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary THA. We retrospectively reviewed the records for 12,726 patients who had undergone primary THA at a single high-volume institution between 2018 and 2021. Patients were stratified by surgical technique (conventional THA, computer-navigated THA [CN-THA], or robotic-assisted THA [RA-THA]) and were matched 1:1 with use of propensity score matching. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the rates of PJI within 90 days postoperatively between the cohorts. After propensity score matching, there were 4,006 patients in the THA versus RA-THA analysis (2,003 in each group) and 5,288 patients in the THA versus CN-THA analysis (2,644 in each group). CN-THA (p < 0.001) and RA-THA (p < 0.001) were associated with longer operative times compared with conventional THA by 3 and 11 minutes, respectively. The rates of PJI after conventional THA (0.2% to 0.4%) were similar to those after CN-THA (0.4%) and RA-THA (0.4%). On the basis of logistic regression, the development of PJI was not associated with the use of computer navigation (odds ratio [OR], 1.8 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.7 to 5.3]; p = 0.232) or robotic assistance (OR, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.3 to 2.3]; p = 0.808). Despite longer operative times associated with the use of computer navigation and robotic assistance, the use of these tools was not associated with an increased risk of PJI within 90 days after surgery. Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Lower 90-day inpatient readmission and 1-year reoperation in patients undergoing robotic versus manual total hip arthroplasty through an anterior approach.

The value of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) has yet to be determined compared to conventional manual THA (mTHA). Evaluate 90-day inpatient readmission rates, rates of reoperation, and clinically significant improvement of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 1-year in a cohort of patients who underwent mTHA or rTHA through a direct anterior (DA) approach. A single-surgeon, prospective institutional cohort of 362 patients who underwent primary THA for osteoarthritis via the DA approach between February 2019 and November 2020 were included. Patient demographics, surgical time, discharge disposition, length of stay, acetabular cup size, 90-day inpatient readmission, 1-year reoperation, and 1-year PROMs were collected for 148 manual and 214 robotic THAs, respectively. Patients undergoing rTHA had lower 90-day readmission (3.74% vs 9.46%, p= 0.04) and lower 1-year reoperation (0.93% vs 4.73% mTHA, p= 0.04). rTHA acetabular cup sizes were smaller (rTHA median 52, interquartile range [IQR] 50; 54, mTHA median 54, IQR 52; 58, p< 0.001). Surgical time was longer for rTHA (114 minutes vs 101 minutes, p< 0.001). At 1-year post-operatively, there was no difference in any of the PROMs evaluated. Robotic THA demonstrated lower 90-day readmissions and 1-year reoperation rates than manual THA via the DA approach. PROMs were not significantly different between the two groups at one year.

Does Approach Matter in Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty? A Comparison of Early Reoperations Between Direct Anterior and Postero-Lateral Approach

BackgroundThere is no consensus on whether direct anterior approach (DAA) or postero-lateral approach (PLA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) confers a lower risk of postoperative complications. Robotic assistance in THA results in a more consistently accurate component position compared to manual THA. The objective of this study was to compare rates of dislocation, reoperation, revision, and patient-reported outcome measures between patients undergoing DAA and PLA robotic-assisted primary THA. MethodsWe identified 2,040 consecutive robotic-assisted primary THAs performed for primary osteoarthritis, using DAA (n = 497) or PLA (n = 1,542) between 2017 and 2020. The mean follow-up was 18 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated survivorship free of dislocation, reoperation, and revision. Achievement of patient acceptable symptom state and minimum clinically important difference were used to compare changes in the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (HOOS JR) and Visual Analog Scale. ResultsDislocation was rare in this series (14 in 2,040, 0.7%), including 1 of 497 (0.2%) in the DAA cohort and 13 of 1,542 (0.8%) in the PLA cohort (P = .210). There was no difference in 2-year reoperation-free survivorship (97.8 versus 98.6%, P = .59) or revision-free survivorship (98.8 versus 99.0%, P = .87) at any time point. After controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, there was no difference in dislocation, reoperation, or revision. At 6-week follow-up, after controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, patients in the DAA cohort had higher odds of achieving HOOS JR minimum clinically important difference (odds ratio = 2.01, P = .012) and HOOS JR patient acceptable symptom state (odds ratio = 1.72, P = .028). There were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures by 3 months. ConclusionsFor robotic-assisted primary THA, DAA may confer enhanced early (<6 weeks) functional recovery compared to the PLA, but there was no significant difference in postoperative dislocation, reoperation, or revision rates.

Variety of femoral anteversion and its measurement in cementless total hip arthroplasty: Does robotic technology improve accuracy?

BackgroundHigh-performance total hip arthroplasty (THA) depends on the accurate position of components. However, femoral anteversion is variable, and current studies only used traditional instruments to evaluate it, such as protractor and spirit level with limited cases. This study aimed to identify the variability in the measured femoral native anteversion and intraoperative stem anteversion under different measurement methods, including intraoperative robotic method. We hypothesized that robotic technology was more accurate than traditional instruments for femoral anteversion evaluation.MethodsThis study included 117 hips of patients who underwent robotic-assisted THA between November 2019 and March 2021. Preoperative native femoral anteversion was measured using a robotic system. Intraoperative femoral stem anteversion was evaluated visually, and then measured with a goniometer and a robotic system, respectively. Variability in the measured femoral native anteversion and intraoperative femoral stem anteversion was calculated and compared. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson correlation analysis were used to assess the consistency and correlation of anteversion of different measurements and postoperative CT-measured stem anteversion, respectively.ResultsThe result of measurement for preoperative native femoral anteversion was more variable than the intraoperative robotic-measured stem anteversion. Intraoperative robotic-measured stem version showed the highest correlation with postoperative CT measurement of stem version (r = 0.806, P < 0.001), while intraoperative surgeon estimation had the lowest correlation coefficient (r = 0.281, P = 0.025). As for the consistency with postoperative CT measurement of femoral stem anteversion, the intraoperative robotic-measured femoral stem version also had the highest value (ICC = 0.892, P < 0.001).ConclusionNative femoral anteversion was variable preoperatively. Using cementless stems, anteversion was also highly variable. Robotic assessment for stem anteversion during surgery was more consistent with the final position than the preoperative assessment and conventional intraoperative estimation.

Patient outcomes of conventional versus robot assisted total hip arthroplasty

Background: Robotic assisted (RA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) may provide improved precision and accuracy; however, contention remains on whether RA THA provides better patient outcomes than conventional THA. This study compares short-term clinical outcomes, complication rates, and operative times between these two groups. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed charts for demographic data, comorbidities, operating time, revisions, and complications of patients who underwent RA and conventional THA. Patient-reported outcomes were collected via OBERD database at the following timepoints: preoperatively, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year postoperatively. Descriptive statistics and mixed multivariate regression analyses were used to analyze data. Results: Two hundred ten patients were included (n=149 conventional, n=61 RA). Patients with RA THAs were younger than those with conventional THAs (59 years, IQR: 53-66 and 64 years, IQR: 58-71; P=.002). The operative time was longer for the RA compared to the conventional group (106 minutes, IQR: 92-120 and 92 minutes, IQR: 82-109, respectively, P=&lt; .001). There was no statistically significant difference in SF-12 mental scores, SF-12 physical scores, or OHS between RA and conventional THA at different timepoints. Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in complication and revision rates between the two groups. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated that there were no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes between the RA versus conventional THA groups. Furthermore, our findings suggest a lack of significant differences in complication or revision rates. Surgeons performing robot-assisted surgeries for hip replacements can reasonably expect patient outcomes that are, at a minimum, as successful as the conventional counterparts.

Physical Human–Robot Interaction Based on Adaptive Impedance Control for Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty

Physical Human–Robot Interaction Based on Adaptive Impedance Control for Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty