Adarsh Annapareddy, Praharsha Mulpur, Tarun Jayakumar, Chethan Shinde, Vemaganti Badri Narayana Prasad, A. V. Gurava Reddy
{"title":"A Radiological Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Techniques in Total Hip Arthroplasty","authors":"Adarsh Annapareddy, Praharsha Mulpur, Tarun Jayakumar, Chethan Shinde, Vemaganti Badri Narayana Prasad, A. V. Gurava Reddy","doi":"10.1007/s43465-024-01232-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>This study investigates the radiological outcomes of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) compared to manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA), addressing the ongoing debate on the effectiveness of RATHA in achieving superior implant positioning accuracy.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>A prospective cohort of 212 patients (103 robotic, 109 manual) underwent THA and were evaluated for postoperative radiological outcomes, focusing on the inclination and anteversion angles of the acetabular cup. Outlier prevalence was assessed based on angles outside the defined Lewinnek safe zones. All post-operative measurements were made using the BoneNinja application.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>High inter-observer and intra-observer reliabilities were observed, validating the measurement accuracy. The mean anteversion and inclination angles in the RATHA cohort were 40.5 ± 1.5 and 24.5 ± 3.1° respectively; and the mTHA cohort were 42.1 ± 4.9 and 24.9 ± 4.5°. There was a statistically significant difference in inclination angles between the two cohorts whereas the anteversion angles showed no difference. Majority of the conventional THRs (<i>N</i> = 72, 55.4%) were placed outside the safe zone for anteversion. The inclination angles revealed a highly significant difference between the cohorts (<i>p</i> < 0.0001), with all the robotic THRs (<i>N</i> = 121, 100%) being placed within the safe zone for inclination, whereas only 70% (<i>N</i> = 91) of the conventional THRs were within the safe zone. 97.5% of RA-THRs were within 3° of the proposed plan, demonstrating high accuracy.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>RATHA significantly outperforms MTHA in radiological accuracy, achieving precise acetabular cup positioning with minimal outliers. These results advocate for RATHA's adoption in THA to enhance outcome predictability and affirm its reliability and safety over manual methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":13338,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-024-01232-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
This study investigates the radiological outcomes of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) compared to manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA), addressing the ongoing debate on the effectiveness of RATHA in achieving superior implant positioning accuracy.
Methods
A prospective cohort of 212 patients (103 robotic, 109 manual) underwent THA and were evaluated for postoperative radiological outcomes, focusing on the inclination and anteversion angles of the acetabular cup. Outlier prevalence was assessed based on angles outside the defined Lewinnek safe zones. All post-operative measurements were made using the BoneNinja application.
Results
High inter-observer and intra-observer reliabilities were observed, validating the measurement accuracy. The mean anteversion and inclination angles in the RATHA cohort were 40.5 ± 1.5 and 24.5 ± 3.1° respectively; and the mTHA cohort were 42.1 ± 4.9 and 24.9 ± 4.5°. There was a statistically significant difference in inclination angles between the two cohorts whereas the anteversion angles showed no difference. Majority of the conventional THRs (N = 72, 55.4%) were placed outside the safe zone for anteversion. The inclination angles revealed a highly significant difference between the cohorts (p < 0.0001), with all the robotic THRs (N = 121, 100%) being placed within the safe zone for inclination, whereas only 70% (N = 91) of the conventional THRs were within the safe zone. 97.5% of RA-THRs were within 3° of the proposed plan, demonstrating high accuracy.
Conclusion
RATHA significantly outperforms MTHA in radiological accuracy, achieving precise acetabular cup positioning with minimal outliers. These results advocate for RATHA's adoption in THA to enhance outcome predictability and affirm its reliability and safety over manual methods.
期刊介绍：
IJO welcomes articles that contribute to Orthopaedic knowledge from India and overseas. We publish articles dealing with clinical orthopaedics and basic research in orthopaedic surgery. Articles are accepted only for exclusive publication in the Indian Journal of Orthopaedics. Previously published articles, articles which are in peer-reviewed electronic publications in other journals, are not accepted by the Journal. Published articles and illustrations become the property of the Journal. The copyright remains with the journal. Studies must be carried out in accordance with World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
