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

Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty

Background: Minimal invasive surgery (MIS) has gained growing popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA) but concerns exist regarding component malpositioning. The aim of the present study was to evaluate femoral and acetabular component positioning in primary cementless THA comparing a lateral to a MIS anterolateral approach. Methods: We evaluated 6 week postoperative radiographs of 52 hips with a minimal invasive anterolateral approach compared to 54 hips with a standard lateral approach. All hips had received the same type of implant for primary cementless unilateral THA and had a healthy hip contralaterally. Results: Hip offset was equally restored comparing both approaches. No influence of the approach was observed with regard to reconstruction of acetabular offset, femoral offset, vertical placement of the center of rotation, stem alignment and leg length discrepancy. However, with the MIS approach, a significantly higher percentage of cups (38.5 %) was malpositioned compared to the standard approach (16.7 %) (p = 0.022). Conclusions: The MIS anterolateral approach allows for comparable reconstruction of stem position, offset and center of rotation compared to the lateral approach. However, surgeons must be aware of a higher risk of cup malpositioning for inclination and anteversion using the MIS anterolateral approach

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

Stem torsion in total hip replacement: CT measurements in 60 patients

Methods 60 patients requiring total hip arthroplasty were prospectively enrolled in this study. Minimally invasive THR was performed (anterior approach) in a lateral decubitus position and each patient underwent a postoperative CT examination. The position of the stem was evaluated by an independent external institution. Results Stem torsion ranged from -19 degrees retrotorsion to 33 degrees antetorsion. Normal antetorsion (i.e 10-15 degrees according to Tonnis) was present in 5 of 60 patients, so the prevalence of abnormal stem antetorsion was 92% (95% CI: 82-97). We found a stem antetorsion outside the range of 0-25 degrees in 21 of 60 hips. Women had a higher mean stem antetorsion (8.0 degrees (SD 11)) than men (1.5 degrees (SD 10)). Interpretation Postoperative stem antetorsion shows a high variability and is gender-related. We suggest precise assessment of stem antetorsion intraoperatively by means of computer navigation, preparing the femur first. In abnormal stem antetorsion, the cup position can be adjusted using a combined anteversion concept; alternatively, modular femoral components or stems with retroverted or anteverted necks ("retrostem") could be used

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