A review of the evolution of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is currently a very successful operation but continues to evolve as we try to perfect techniques and improve outcomes for our patients. Robotic hip surgery (RHS) began with the 'active' ROBODOC system in the 1980s. There were drawbacks associated with the original ROBODOC and most recently, the MAKO robot was introduced with early promising results. AIM: The aim of this paper is to provide an up-to-date review surrounding this area and discuss the pros and cons of this technique. METHODS: A literature review searching Medline, Embase, Ovidsp, Cochrane library, pubmed database and google scholar was performed searching keywords including: 'Robotic hip surgery', 'Robotic orthopaedic surgery', 'Computer assisted hip surgery', 'robotic arthroplasty', and 'computer assisted orthopaedic surgery'. CONCLUSION: Robotic hip surgery aims to tackle the limitations of the human factor in surgery by promising reproducible and reliable methods of component positioning in arthroplasty surgery. However, as orthopaedic surgeons, we must critically appraise all new technology and support the use providing there is sound robust evidence backing it

UK survey of occupational therapist’s and physiotherapist’s experiences and attitudes towards hip replacement precautions and equipment

Background: Total hip replacement (THR) is one of the most common orthopaedic procedures in the United Kingdom (UK). Historically, people following THR have been provided with hip precautions and equipment such as: raised toilet seats and furniture rises, in order to reduce the risks of dislocation post-operation. The purpose of this study was to determine current practices in the provision of these interventions in the UK for people following primary THR. Methods: A 27-question, self-administered online survey was developed and distributed to UK physiotherapists and occupational therapists involved in the management of people following primary THR (target respondents). The survey included questions regarding the current practices in the provision of equipment and hip precautions for THR patients, and physiotherapist’s and occupational therapist’s attitudes towards these practices. The survey was disseminated through print and web-based/social media channels. Results: 170 health professionals (87 physiotherapists and 83 occupational therapists), responded to the survey. Commonly prescribed equipment in respondent’s health trusts were raised toilet seats (95%), toilet frames and rails (88%), furniture raises (79%), helping hands/grabbers (77%), perching stools (75%) and long-handled shoe horns (75%). Hip precautions were routinely prescribed by 97% of respondents. Hip precautions were most frequently taught in a pre-operative group (52% of respondents). Similarly equipment was most frequently provided pre-operatively (61% respondents), and most commonly by occupational therapists (74% respondents). There was variability in the advice provided on the duration of hip precautions and equipment from up to six weeks post-operatively to life-time usage. Conclusions: Current practice on hip precautions and provision of equipment is not full representative of clinician’s perceptions of best care after THR. Future research is warranted to determine whether and to whom hip precautions and equipment should be prescribed post-THR as opposed to the current ‘blanket’ provision of equipment and movement restriction provided in UK practice

The role of dedicated instrumentation in total hip arthroplasty

Tissue-sparing surgery is a surgical strategy aimed to reduce tissue damage in joint replacement. This can be achieved by reducing soft tissue trauma, performing minimally invasive access routes and limiting bone removal with implantation of conservative prostheses. In order to facilitate mini-approaches, special instrumentation was developed to avoid impingement of the soft tissues and provide an easier and more correct placement of the components. We performed an analysis of the literature and a research of the instrumentation available today, to evaluate the actual utility of dedicated tools

Minimally invasive computer-navigated total hip arthroplasty, following the concept of femur first and combined anteversion: design of a blinded randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Impingement can be a serious complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA), and is one of the major causes of postoperative pain, dislocation, aseptic loosening, and implant breakage. Minimally invasive THA and computer-navigated surgery were introduced several years ago. We have developed a novel, computer-assisted operation method for THA following the concept of "femur first"/"combined anteversion", which incorporates various aspects of performing a functional optimization of the cup position, and comprehensively addresses range of motion (ROM) as well as cup containment and alignment parameters. Hence, the purpose of this study is to assess whether the artificial joint's ROM can be improved by this computer-assisted operation method. Second, the clinical and radiological outcome will be evaluated.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A registered patient- and observer-blinded randomized controlled trial will be conducted. Patients between the ages of 50 and 75 admitted for primary unilateral THA will be included. Patients will be randomly allocated to either receive minimally invasive computer-navigated "femur first" THA or the conventional minimally invasive THA procedure. Self-reported functional status and health-related quality of life (questionnaires) will be assessed both preoperatively and postoperatively. Perioperative complications will be registered. Radiographic evaluation will take place up to 6 weeks postoperatively with a computed tomography (CT) scan. Component position will be evaluated by an independent external institute on a 3D reconstruction of the femur/pelvis using image-processing software. Postoperative ROM will be calculated by an algorithm which automatically determines bony and prosthetic impingements.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>In the past, computer navigation has improved the accuracy of component positioning. So far, there are only few objective data quantifying the risks and benefits of computer navigated THA. Therefore, this study has been designed to compare minimally invasive computer-navigated "femur first" THA with a conventional technique for minimally invasive THA. The results of this trial will be presented as soon as they become available.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>DRKS00000739</p

Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches and Traditional Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Radiological and Complications Outcomes

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty (MITHA) remains considerably controversial. Limited visibility and prosthesis malposition increase the risk of post-surgical complications compared to those of the traditional method. METHODS: A meta-analysis was undertaken of all published databases up to May 2011. The studies were divided into four subgroups according to the surgical approach taken. The radiological outcomes and complications of minimally invasive surgery were compared to traditional total hip arthroplasty (TTHA) using risk ratio, mean difference, and standardized mean difference statistics. RESULTS: In five studies involving the posterolateral approach, no significant differences were found between the MITHA groups and the TTHA groups in the acetabular cup abduction angle (p = 0.41), acetabular anteversion (p = 0.96), and femoral prosthesis position (p = 0.83). However, the femoral offset was significantly increased (WMD = 3.00; 95% CI, 0.40-5.60; p = 0.02). Additionally, there were no significant differences among the complications in both the groups (dislocations, nerve injury, infection, deep vein thrombosis, proximal femoral fracture) and revision rate (p>0.05). In three studies involving the posterior approach, there were no significant differences in radiological outcomes or all other complications between MITHA or TTHA groups (p>0.05). Three studies involved anterolateral approach, while 2 studies used the lateral approach. However, the information from imaging and complications was not adequate for statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Posterior MITHA seems to be a safe surgical procedure, without the increased risk of post-operative complication rates and component malposition rates. The posterolateral approach THA may lead to increased femoral offset. The current data are not enough to reach a positive conclusion that lateral and anterolateral approaches will result in increased risks of adverse effects and complications at the prosthesis site

Simultaneous bilateral total knee and ankle arthroplasty as a single surgical procedure

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Simultaneous osteoarthritis (OA) of the ankle joint complicates primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In such cases, rehabilitation of TKA is limited by debilitating ankle pain, but varus or valgus ankle arthritis may even compromise placement of knee prosthetic components.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We present a patient with simultaneous bilateral valgus and patellofemoral OA of the knees and bilateral varus OA of the ankle joints that equally contributed to overall disability. This 63 years old, motivated and otherwise healthy patient was treated by simultaneous bilateral total knee and ankle arthroplasty (quadruple total joint arthroplasty, TJA) during the same anesthesia. Two years outcome showed excellent alignment and function of all four replaced joints. Postoperative time for rehabilitation, back to work (6th week) and hospital stay (12 days) of this special patient was markedly reduced compared to the usual course of separate TJA.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Simultaneous quadruple TJA in equally disabling OA of bilateral deformed knees and ankles resulted in a better functional outcome and faster recovery compared to the average reported results after TKA and TAA in literature. However, careful preoperative planning, extensive patient education, and two complete surgical teams were considered essential for successful performance. To the best of our knowledge this is the first case report in literature about quadruple major total joint arthroplasty implanted during the same anesthesia in the same patient.</p