Does Robotic-arm Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty Benefit Short-Term Clinical Outcomes? A Pair Match-Controlled Study - הכנס השנתי ה-38 של האיגוד הישראלי לאורתופדיה בשיתוף עם הכנס השנתי ה-28 של האיגוד הישראלי לכירורגיה של היד

Itay Perets ^1,2 John P. Walsh ^1,3 Brian H. Mu ^1,4 Yosif Mansor ^1,5 Leslie C. Yuen ¹ Muriel R. Battaglia ¹ Benjamin G. Domb ^1,6

¹Research, American Hip Institute, USA
²Orthopaedic Surgery, Hadassah Hebrew University Hospital, Israel
³Medicine, Des Moines University, USA
⁴Medicine, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, USA
⁵Orthopaedic Surgery, Chaim Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, USA
⁶Orthopaedic Surgery, Hinsdale Orthopaedics, USA

Introduction: Recent advances have made robotic assistance a viable option in total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the clinical outcomes of this procedure relative to manual THA are limited in the current literature. This study presents short-term outcomes of robotic-arm assisted THA compared to a pair-matched control group of patients who underwent manual THA.

Methods: Data were prospectively collected on all THAs performed from July 2011 to January 2015. Patients were included if they underwent robotic-arm assisted primary THA treating idiopathic osteoarthritis and were eligible for minimum two-year follow-up. Outcomes were measured using Harris Hip Score (HHS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12), pain on a visual analog scale (VAS), and satisfaction from 0-10. Postoperative radiographs were analyzed for cup inclination, cup version, leg length discrepancy, and global offset. Patients who underwent THA with robotic-arm assistance were matched 1:1 with manual THA patients for age, sex, BMI, and surgical approach.

Results: There were 85 patients in each study group. There were no significant differences in the demographic factors that were matched between groups. Both HHS and FJS-12 were significantly higher in the robotic assistance group at minimum two-year follow-up. VAS was lower in the robotic assistance group, but this result was not statistically significant (p= 0.120). A significantly higher proportion of patients were in both the Lewinnek and Callanan safe zones for cup orientation (p< 0.001). There was no difference in patient satisfaction. There was no significant difference in the rate of complications or subsequent revision surgeries between groups.

Conclusion: Performing THA with robotic-arm assistance may be of benefit to short-term patient outcomes compared to manual THA. There were no differences found regarding the rate of complications or subsequent revisions between groups, suggesting the procedure is safe compared to manual THA.