Robotic guidance in total hip arthroplasty: the shape of things to come

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

OBJECTIVE

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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±1.55 mm) in the RA-THA group were significantly lesser than those in the MTHA group (2.22°±1.11° and 5.81±6.27 mm, respectively; t=-2.95 and t=-3.88, P <0.05).

CONCLUSION

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.

Adoption of Robotic Arm-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty Results in Reliable Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes at Minimum Two-Year Follow Up

INTRODUCTION

Longevity and success of total hip arthroplasty (THA) is largely dependent on component positioning. While use of robotic platforms can improve this positioning, published evidence on its clinical benefits is limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes of THA with robotic surgical assistance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an analysis of robotic arm-assisted primary THAs performed by a single surgeon utilizing a posterior approach. A total of 99 patients (107 cases) who had a minimum two-year follow up were identified. Their mean age was 61 years (range, 33 to 84 years), and their mean body mass index was 30.5 kg/m2 (range, 18.5 to 49.1 kg/m2). There were 56% female patients and primary osteoarthritis was the principal hip diagnosis in 88.8%. Operative times, lengths of hospital stay, and discharge dispositions were recorded, along with any complications. Modified Harris Hip Scores (HHS) were calculated to quantify clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Mean postoperative increases in HHS at 2- to 5.7-year follow up was 33 points (range, 6 to 77 points). There were no complications attributable to the use of robotic assistance. Surgical-site complications were rare; one case underwent a revision for prosthetic joint infection (0.93%) but there were no dislocations, periprosthetic fractures, or cases of mechanical implant loosening. There was no evidence of progressive radiolucencies or radiographic failure.

DISCUSSION

Robotic arm-assisted THA resulted in low complication rates at minimum two-year follow up, with clinical outcomes comparable to those reported with manual surgery.1-4 The haptically-guided acetabular bone preparation enabled reliable cementless acetabular fixation and there were no adverse events related to the use of the robot. Dislocations were avoided in this case series. Randomized controlled clinical trials are needed to compare manual to robotic surgery and to investigate whether the precision found with this functional planning will reliably reduce the incidence of dislocations.

Robotic-assisted compared with conventional total hip arthroplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) allows for accurate preoperative planning and component positioning, potentially enhancing implant survival and long-term outcomes. The relative efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted and conventional THA, however, are unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted and conventional THA.

METHODS

Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched in September 2017 to identify studies comparing the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted and conventional THA. Seven studies were included. Data of interest were extracted and analysed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

The seven included studies involved 1516 patients, with 522 undergoing robotic-assisted and 994 undergoing conventional THA. Compared with conventional THA, robotic-assisted THA was associated with longer surgical time (not significant); lower intraoperative complication rates (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.34, p<0.0001 I²); better cup placement, stem placement and global offset and a higher rate of heterotopic ossifications. Functional scores, limb length discrepancy and rates of revision and stress shielding were similar in the two groups. The relative amount of blood loss was unclear.

CONCLUSION

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that robotic-assisted THA has certain advantages over conventional THA, including the results of component positioning and rates of intraoperative complications. Additional comparative studies are required to determine the long-term clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted THA.

The Evolution of Computer-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty and Relevant Applications

In total hip arthroplasty (THA), the accurate positioning of implants is the key to achieve a good clinical outcome. Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) has been developed for more accurate positioning of implants during the THA. There are passive, semi-active, and active systems in CAOS for THA. Navigation is a passive system that only provides information and guidance to the surgeon. There are 3 types of navigation: imageless navigation, computed tomography (CT)-based navigation, and fluoroscopy-based navigation. In imageless navigation system, a new method of registration without the need to register the anterior pelvic plane was introduced. CT-based navigation can be efficiently used for pelvic plane reference, the functional pelvic plane in supine which adjusts anterior pelvic plane sagittal tilt for targeting the cup orientation. Robot-assisted system can be either active or semi-active. The active robotic system performs the preparation for implant positioning as programmed preoperatively. It has been used for only femoral implant cavity preparation. Recently, program for cup positioning was additionally developed. Alternatively, for ease of surgeon acceptance, semi-active robot systems are developed. It was initially applied only for cup positioning. However, with the development of enhanced femoral workflows, this system can now be used to position both cup and stem. Though there have been substantial advancements in computer-assisted THA, its use can still be controversial at present due to the steep learning curve, intraoperative technical issues, high cost and etc. However, in the future, CAOS will certainly enable the surgeon to operate more accurately and lead to improved outcomes in THA as the technology continues to evolve rapidly.

Robotic total hip arthroplasty

Modern total hip replacement is typically effective and durable, but early failures do occur. Component position influences functional outcome, durability, and risk of complications. Surgical robotics provides the detail-oriented surgeon with a robust tool to optimize the accuracy and precision of total hip arthroplasty, with the potential to minimize risk of mechanical failure. This article describes efficient workflows for using surgical robotics to optimize surgical precision without increasing surgical complexity.

A novel method for accurate and reproducible functional cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty

Cup positioning is an important variable for short and long term function, stability, and durability of total hip arthroplasty (THA). This novel method utilizes internal and external bony landmarks, and the transverse acetabular ligament for positioning the acetabular component. The cup is placed parallel and superior to the transverse ligament and inside the anterior wall notch of the true acetabulum, then adjusted for femoral version and pelvic tilt and obliquity based on weight bearing radiographs. In 78 consecutive THAs, the mean functional anteversion and abduction angles were 17.9° ± 4.7° and 41.7° ± 3.8°, respectively. 96% of the functional anteversion measurements and 100% of the functional abduction angles were within the safe zone. This technique is an easy, reproducible, and accurate method for functional cup placement.

A low-cost solution for the restoration of femoral head centre during total hip arthroplasty

Restoration of joint centre during total hip arthroplasty is critical. While computer-aided navigation can improve accuracy during total hip arthroplasty, its expense makes it inaccessible to the majority of surgeons. This article evaluates the use, in the laboratory, of a calliper with a simple computer application to measure changes in femoral head centres during total hip arthroplasty. The computer application was designed using Microsoft Excel and used calliper measurements taken pre- and post-femoral head resection to predict the change in head centre in terms of offset and vertical height between the femoral head and newly inserted prosthesis. Its accuracy was assessed using a coordinate measuring machine to compare changes in preoperative and post-operative head centre when simulating stem insertion on 10 sawbone femurs. A femoral stem with a modular neck was used, which meant nine possible head centre configurations were available for each femur, giving 90 results. The results show that using this technique during a simulated total hip arthroplasty, it was possible to restore femoral head centre to within 6 mm for offset (mean 1.67 ± 1.16 mm) and vertical height (mean 2.14 ± 1.51 mm). It is intended that this low-cost technique be extended to inform the surgeon of a best-fit solution in terms of neck length and neck type for a specific prosthesis.

Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery and robotic surgery in total hip arthroplasty

Various systems of computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) were reviewed. The first clinically applied system was an active robotic system (ROBODOC), which performed femoral implant cavity preparation as programmed preoperatively. Several reports on cementless THA with ROBODOC showed better stem alignment and less variance in limb-length inequality on radiographic evaluation, less incidence of pulmonary embolic events on transesophageal cardioechogram, and less stress shielding on the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry analysis than conventional manual methods. On the other hand, some studies raise issues with active systems, including a steep learning curve, muscle and nerve damage, and technical complications, such as a procedure stop due to a bone motion during cutting, requiring re-registration and registration failure. Semi-active robotic systems, such as Acrobot and Rio, were developed for ease of surgeon acceptance. The drill bit at the tip of the robotic arm is moved by a surgeon's hand, but it does not move outside of a milling path boundary, which is defined according to three-dimensional (3D) image-based preoperative planning. However, there are still few reports on THA with these semi-active systems. Thanks to the advancements in 3D sensor technology, navigation systems were developed. Navigation is a passive system, which does not perform any actions on patients. It only provides information and guidance to the surgeon who still uses conventional tools to perform the surgery. There are three types of navigation: computed tomography (CT)-based navigation, imageless navigation, and fluoro-navigation. CT-based navigation is the most accurate, but the preoperative planning on CT images takes time that increases cost and radiation exposure. Imageless navigation does not use CT images, but its accuracy depends on the technique of landmark pointing, and it does not take into account the individual uniqueness of the anatomy. Fluoroscopic navigation is good for trauma and spine surgeries, but its benefits are limited in the hip and knee reconstruction surgeries. Several studies have shown that the cup alignment with navigation is more precise than that of the conventional mechanical instruments, and that it is useful for optimizing limb length, range of motion, and stability. Recently, patient specific templates, based on CT images, have attracted attention and some early reports on cup placement, and resurfacing showed improved accuracy of the procedures. These various CAOS systems have pros and cons. Nonetheless, CAOS is a useful tool to help surgeons perform accurately what surgeons want to do in order to better achieve their clinical objectives. Thus, it is important that the surgeon fully understands what he or she should be trying to achieve in THA for each patient.