The variables involved in a robotic THA can exceed 52: many parameters as pelvic orientation with CT scan, templating, offset, and leg-length, acetabular reaming, femoral osteotomy, mapping the anatomy; predefining safe zones, robotic execution, femoral head size, thickness of PE etc. with several variables for each parameter, with a total number of variables exceeding 52. This familiar number is the number of cards in a standard deck. The number of possible combinations (factorial 52! = 10^67) to shuffle the cards (and may be to perform a THA) is greater than the number of atoms on earth! Thinking that artificial intelligence and robotics can solve these problems, some surgeons and implant manufacturers have turned to artificial intelligence and robotics. We asked two questions:1) can robot with artificial intelligence really process 52 variables that represent 10^67 combinations? 2) the safety of the technology was ascertained by interrogating Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database about software-related recalls in computer-assisted and robotic arthroplasty [1], between 2017 and 2022. 1). The best computers can only calculate around 100 thousand billion combinations (10^14), and with difficulty: it takes more than 100 days to arrive at this number of digits (10^14) after the decimal point for the number π (pi). We can, therefore, expect the robot to be imperfect. 2). For the FDA software-related recalls, 4634 units were involved. The FDA determined root causes were: software design (66.6%), design change (22.2%), manufacturing deployment (5.6%), design manufacturing process (5.6%). Among the manufacturers’ reasons for recalls, a specific error was declared in 88.9%. a coding error in 43.8%. 94.4% software-related recalls were classified as class 2. Return of the device was the main action taken by firms (44.4%), followed by software update (38.9%). 3). In the same period, no robot complained about its surgeon!. Hip surgeon is as intelligent as a robot and almost twice as safe

Aims. Achieving accurate implant positioning and restoring native hip biomechanics are key surgeon-controlled technical objectives in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The primary objective of this study was to compare the reproducibility of the planned preoperative centre of hip rotation (COR) in patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted THA versus conventional THA. Methods. This prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) included 60 patients with symptomatic hip osteoarthritis undergoing conventional THA (CO THA) versus robotic arm-assisted THA (RO THA). Patients in both arms underwent pre- and postoperative CT scans, and a patient-specific plan was created using the robotic software. The COR, combined offset, acetabular orientation, and leg length discrepancy were measured on the pre- and postoperative CT scanogram at six weeks following surgery. Results. There were no significant differences for any of the baseline characteristics including spinopelvic mobility. The absolute error for achieving the planned horizontal COR was median 1.4 mm (interquartile range (IQR) 0.87 to 3.42) in RO THA versus 4.3 mm (IQR 3 to 6.8; p < 0.001); vertical COR mean 0.91 mm (SD 0.73) in RO THA versus 2.3 mm (SD 1.3; p < 0.001); and combined offset median 2 mm (IQR 0.97 to 5.45) in RO THA versus 3.9 mm (IQR 2 to 7.9; p = 0.019). Improved accuracy was observed with RO THA in achieving the desired acetabular component positioning (root mean square error for anteversion and inclination was 2.6 and 1.3 vs 8.9 and 5.3, repectively) and leg length (mean 0.6 mm vs 1.4 mm; p < 0.001). Patient-reported outcome measures were comparable between the two groups at baseline and one year. Participants in the RO THA group needed fewer physiotherapy sessions postoperatively (median six (IQR 4.5 to 8) vs eight (IQR 6 to 11; p = 0.005). Conclusion. This RCT suggested that robotic-arm assistance in THA was associated with improved accuracy in restoring the native COR, better preservation of the combined offset, leg length correction, and superior accuracy in achieving the desired acetabular component positioning. Further evaluation through long-term and registry data is necessary to assess whether these findings translate into improved implant survival and functional outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):324–335

Aims. The current study aimed to compare robotic arm-assisted (RA-THA), computer-assisted (CA-THA), and manual (M-THA) total hip arthroplasty regarding in-hospital metrics including length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, in-hospital complications, and cost of RA-THA versus M-THA and CA-THA versus M-THA, as well as trends in use and uptake over a ten-year period, and future projections of uptake and use of RA-THA and CA-THA. Methods. The National Inpatient Sample was queried for primary THAs (2008 to 2017) which were categorized into RA-THA, CA-THA, and M-THA. Past and projected use, demographic characteristics distribution, income, type of insurance, location, and healthcare setting were compared among the three cohorts. In-hospital complications, LOS, discharge disposition, and in-hospital costs were compared between propensity score-matched cohorts of M-THA versus RA-THA and M-THA versus CA-THA to adjust for baseline characteristics and comorbidities. Results. RA-THA and CA-THA did not exhibit any clinically meaningful reduction in mean LOS (RA-THA 2.2 days (SD 1.4) vs 2.3 days (SD 1.8); p < 0.001, and CA-THA 2.5 days (SD 1.9) vs 2.7 days (SD 2.3); p < 0.001, respectively) compared to their respective propensity score-matched M-THA cohorts. RA-THA, but not CA-THA, had similar non-home discharge rates to M-THA (RA-THA 17.4% vs 18.5%; p = 0.205, and 18.7% vs 24.9%; p < 0.001, respectively). Implant-related mechanical complications were lower in RA-THA (RA-THA 0.5% vs M-THA 3.1%; p < 0.001, and CA-THA 1.2% vs M-THA 2.2%; p < 0.001), which was associated with a significantly lower in-hospital dislocation (RA-THA 0.1% vs M-THA 0.8%; p < 0.001). Both RA-THA and CA-THA demonstrated higher mean higher index in-hospital costs (RA-THA $18,416 (SD $8,048) vs M-THA $17,266 (SD $8,396); p < 0.001, and CA-THA $20,295 (SD $8,975) vs M-THA $18,624 (SD $9,226); p < 0.001, respectively). Projections indicate that 23.9% and 3.2% of all THAs conducted in 2025 will be robotic arm- and computer-assisted, respectively. Projections indicated that RA-THA use may overtake M-THA by 2028 (48.3%) and reach 65.8% of all THAs by 2030. Conclusion. Technology-assisted THA, particularly RA-THA, may provide value by lowering in-hospital early dislocation rates and and other in-hospital metrics compared to M-THA. Higher index-procedure and hospital costs warrant further comprehensive cost analyses to determine the true added value of RA-THA in the episode of care, particularly since we project that one in four THAs in 2025 and two in three THA by 2030 will use RA-THA technology. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1488–1496

Aims. Traditionally, acetabular component insertion during total hip arthroplasty (THA) is visually assisted in the posterior approach and fluoroscopically assisted in the anterior approach. The present study examined the accuracy of a new surgeon during anterior (NSA) and posterior (NSP) THA using robotic arm-assisted technology compared to two experienced surgeons using traditional methods. Methods. Prospectively collected data was reviewed for 120 patients at two institutions. Data were collected on the first 30 anterior approach and the first 30 posterior approach surgeries performed by a newly graduated arthroplasty surgeon (all using robotic arm-assisted technology) and was compared to standard THA by an experienced anterior (SSA) and posterior surgeon (SSP). Acetabular component inclination, version, and leg length were calculated postoperatively and differences calculated based on postoperative film measurement. Results. Demographic data were similar between groups with the exception of BMI being lower in the NSA group (27.98 vs 25.2; p = 0.005). Operating time and total time in operating room (TTOR) was lower in the SSA (p < 0.001) and TTOR was higher in the NSP group (p = 0.014). Planned versus postoperative leg length discrepancy were similar among both anterior and posterior surgeries (p > 0.104). Planned versus postoperative abduction and anteversion were similar among the NSA and SSA (p > 0.425), whereas planned versus postoperative abduction and anteversion were lower in the NSP (p < 0.001). Outliers > 10 mm from planned leg length were present in one case of the SSP and NSP, with none in the anterior groups. There were no outliers > 10° in anterior or posterior for abduction in all surgeons. The SSP had six outliers > 10° in anteversion while the NSP had none (p = 0.004); the SSA had no outliers for anteversion while the NSA had one (p = 0.500). Conclusion. Robotic arm-assisted technology allowed a newly trained surgeon to produce similarly accurate results and outcomes as experienced surgeons in anterior and posterior hip arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(6):365–370

Aims. Precise implant positioning, tailored to individual spinopelvic biomechanics and phenotype, is paramount for stability in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite a few studies on instability prediction, there is a notable gap in research utilizing artificial intelligence (AI). The objective of our pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility of developing an AI algorithm tailored to individual spinopelvic mechanics and patient phenotype for predicting impingement. Methods. This international, multicentre prospective cohort study across two centres encompassed 157 adults undergoing primary robotic arm-assisted THA. Impingement during specific flexion and extension stances was identified using the virtual range of motion (ROM) tool of the robotic software. The primary AI model, the Light Gradient-Boosting Machine (LGBM), used tabular data to predict impingement presence, direction (flexion or extension), and type. A secondary model integrating tabular data with plain anteroposterior pelvis radiographs was evaluated to assess for any potential enhancement in prediction accuracy. Results. We identified nine predictors from an analysis of baseline spinopelvic characteristics and surgical planning parameters. Using fivefold cross-validation, the LGBM achieved 70.2% impingement prediction accuracy. With impingement data, the LGBM estimated direction with 85% accuracy, while the support vector machine (SVM) determined impingement type with 72.9% accuracy. After integrating imaging data with a multilayer perceptron (tabular) and a convolutional neural network (radiograph), the LGBM’s prediction was 68.1%. Both combined and LGBM-only had similar impingement direction prediction rates (around 84.5%). Conclusion. This study is a pioneering effort in leveraging AI for impingement prediction in THA, utilizing a comprehensive, real-world clinical dataset. Our machine-learning algorithm demonstrated promising accuracy in predicting impingement, its type, and direction. While the addition of imaging data to our deep-learning algorithm did not boost accuracy, the potential for refined annotations, such as landmark markings, offers avenues for future enhancement. Prior to clinical integration, external validation and larger-scale testing of this algorithm are essential. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(8):671–680

The MAKO Robotic arm is a haptic robotic system that can be used to optimise performance during total hip arthroplasty (THA). We present the outcome of the first 40 robotic cases performed in an NHS foundation trust along with the technique of performing robotic THA in our unit. Forty consecutive patients undergoing robotic THA (rTHA) were compared to a case matched group of patients undergoing manual THA (m-THA). 2:1 blinded case matching was performed for age, sex, implants used (Trident uncemented socket and cemented Exeter stem, Stryker Mahwah, NJ, US) and surgeon grade. Comparisons were made for radiological positioning of implants, including leg length assessment, and patient reported functional outcome (PROMS). Pre- and post-operative radiographs were independently analysed by 2 authors. All patients underwent THA for a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis. No significant difference between groups was identified for post-operative leg length discrepancy (LLD) although pre-operatively a significantly higher LLD was highlighted on the MAKO group, likely due to patient selection. Significantly lower post-operative socket version was identified in the MAKO cohort although no difference in post-operative cup inclination was noted. However, there was significantly larger variance in post-op LLD (p=0.024), cup version (p=0.004) and inclination (p=0.05) between groups indicating r-THA was significantly less variable (Levene's test for homogeneity of variance). There was no significant difference in the number of cases outside of Lewinnek's ‘safe’ zone for inclination (p=0.469), however, there were significantly more cases outside Lewinnek's ‘safe’ zone for version (12.5% vs 40.3%, p=0.002) in the m-THA group. We report the commencement of performance of MAKO robotic THA in an NHS institution. No problems with surgery were reported during our learning curve. Robotic THA cases had less variability in terms of implant positioning suggesting that the MAKO robot allows more accurate, less variable implant positioning with fewer outliers. Longer term follow-up of more cases is needed to identify whether this improved implant positioning has an effect on outcomes, but the initial results seem promising

The SPAIRE technique (Saving Piriformis And Internus, Repair Externus) was first described in 2016 and an approach to the hip in the interval between the inferior gemellus and quadratus femoris can be used for both hemi- and total hip arthroplasty. The HemiSPAIRE technique in hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures has been compared with the standard lateral approach (advocated by NICE) in a pragmatic, superiority, multicentre, randomised controlled trial into postoperative mobility and function. This NIHR funded study was recruited between November 2019 and April 2022 and the results are reported in this presentation. The author has used the SPAIRE technique in 1026 routine primary total hip replacements since February 2016. The technique is described along with results from NJR data. SPAIRE is most challenging in patients with small anatomy, reduced offset, with an external rotation deformity. Particularly in these, but in all cases, MAKO robotic assistance facilitates accurate implantation of prostheses and precise recreation of biomechanics. The MAKO robot has been used in all cases since 2018 and SPAIRE/MAKO is now the standard of care in the author's practice. To evaluate whether robotic-assisted tendon-sparing posterior approaches (piriformis sparing and SPAIRE), improve patient outcomes in total hip arthroplasty compared with a robotic-assisted standard posterior approach, the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme has recently funded the HIPSTER trial (HIP Surgical Techniques to Enhance Rehabilitation). This is a single-centre, double-blinded, parallel three-arm, randomised, controlled, superiority trial; recruitment is in progress. The greatest value of robotic assistance may be when it is used in combination with tendon-sparing surgery. Data is being gathered to evaluate whether the SPAIRE/MAKO technique confers benefits with regard the speed of post-op mobilisation as well as accelerated return to unrestricted function

The purposes of this study were to evaluate the accuracy and feasibility of a robotic preparation for acetabular metal augments in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Mako robotic arm reaming was used in 7 DDH to prepare the bony cavities for both Trident PSL cups and Tritanium acetabular wedge augments in six hips with Crowe 2 or 3 DDH. In CT-based planning, a properly sized cup was placed in the original acetabulum, and the same sized cup was also placed to fit the superolateral acetabular defect. The coordinates of the planned positions of cup and augment were recorded to manage the robotic arm reaming. After registration of the patient's pelvis, robotic reaming was performed first for the augment, then, for the cup by changing the target position of reaming as planned. The accuracy of the cup and augment placement was assessed on postoperative CT. To evaluate the feasibility of the robotic procedure, the OR time and blood loss were compared with those of 13 patients who received the same cup and augment systems with a conventional technique. All procedures were done without fracture or fixation failure. There were no differences in OR time or blood loss between the two procedures. Postoperative CT measurements of the distance between the cup center and the augment sphere center showed less than 2mm difference from the Mako preoperative planning. Although a longer time of follow up evaluation is mandatory, our robotic acetabular augment preparation technique is accurate and feasible

Aims. Computer-assisted 3D preoperative planning software has the potential to improve postoperative stability in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Commonly, preoperative protocols simulate two functional positions (standing and relaxed sitting) but do not consider other common positions that may increase postoperative impingement and possible dislocation. This study investigates the feasibility of simulating commonly encountered positions, and positions with an increased risk of impingement, to lower postoperative impingement risk in a CT-based 3D model. Methods. A robotic arm-assisted arthroplasty planning platform was used to investigate 11 patient positions. Data from 43 primary THAs were used for simulation. Sacral slope was retrieved from patient preoperative imaging, while angles of hip flexion/extension, hip external/internal rotation, and hip abduction/adduction for tested positions were derived from literature or estimated with a biomechanical model. The hip was placed in the described positions, and if impingement was detected by the software, inspection of the impingement type was performed. Results. In flexion, an overall impingement rate of 2.3% was detected for flexed-seated, squatting, forward-bending, and criss-cross-sitting positions, and 4.7% for the ankle-over-knee position. In extension, most hips (60.5%) were found to impinge at or prior to 50° of external rotation (pivoting). Many of these impingement events were due to a prominent ischium. The mean maximum external rotation prior to impingement was 45.9° (15° to 80°) and 57.9° (20° to 90°) prior to prosthetic impingement. No impingement was found in standing, sitting, crossing ankles, seiza, and downward dog. Conclusion. This study demonstrated that positions of daily living tested in a CT-based 3D model show high rates of impingement. Simulating additional positions through 3D modelling is a low-cost method of potentially improving outcomes without compromising patient safety. By incorporating CT-based 3D modelling of positions of daily living into routine preoperative protocols for THA, there is the potential to lower the risk of postoperative impingement events. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(6):416–423

Aims. The primary objective of this study was to develop a validated classification system for assessing iatrogenic bone trauma and soft-tissue injury during total hip arthroplasty (THA). The secondary objective was to compare macroscopic bone trauma and soft-tissues injury in conventional THA (CO THA) versus robotic arm-assisted THA (RO THA) using this classification system. Methods. This study included 30 CO THAs versus 30 RO THAs performed by a single surgeon. Intraoperative photographs of the osseous acetabulum and periacetabular soft-tissues were obtained prior to implantation of the acetabular component, which were used to develop the proposed classification system. Interobserver and intraobserver variabilities of the proposed classification system were assessed. Results. The BOne trauma and Soft-Tissue Injury classification system in total Hip arthroplasty (BOSTI Hip) grades osseous acetabular trauma and periarticular muscle damage during THA. The classification system has an interclass correlation coefficient of 0.90 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.93) for interobserver agreement and 0.89 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.93) for intraobserver agreement. RO THA was associated with improved BOSTI Hip scores (p = 0.002) and more pristine osseous surfaces in the anterior superior (p = 0.001) and posterior superior (p < 0.001) acetabular quadrants compared with CO THA. There were no differences between the groups in relation to injury to the gluteus medius (p = 0.084), obturator internus (p = 0.241), piriformis (p = 0.081), superior gamellus (p = 0.116), inferior gamellus (p = 0.132), quadratus femoris (p = 0.208), and vastus lateralis (p = 0.135), but overall combined muscle injury was reduced in RO THA compared with CO THA (p = 0.023). Discussion. The proposed BOSTI Hip classification provides a reproducible grading system for stratifying iatrogenic bone trauma and soft-tissue injury during THA. RO THA was associated with improved BOSTI Hip scores, more pristine osseous acetabular surfaces, and reduced combined periarticular muscle injury compared with CO THA. Further research is required to understand if these intraoperative findings translate to differences in clinical outcomes between the treatment groups. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):898–906

The purpose of this study was to assess the variability in implant position between sides in patients who underwent staged, bilateral THA and whether variation from one side to the other affected patient-reported outcomes. A retrospective review was conducted on 207 patients who underwent staged, bilateral THA by the same surgeon from 2017–2022. Leg length, acetabular height, cup version, and coronal and sagittal stem angles were assessed radiographically and compared to the contralateral THA. Surgical approach and technology utilization were further assessed for their impact on variability. Linear regression was used to model the relationship between side-to-side variability and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS). Between sides, mean radiographic leg length varied by 4.6mm (0.0–21.2), acetabular height varied by 3.3mm (0.0–13.7), anteversion varied by 8.2° (0.0 to 28.7), coronal stem alignment varied by 1.1° (0.0 to 6.9), and sagittal angulation varied by 2.3° (0.0 to 10.5). The anterior approach resulted in more variability in stem angle position in both the coronal (1.3° vs. 1.0°, p=0.036) and sagittal planes (2.8° vs. 2.0° p=0.012) compared to the posterior approach. The posterior approach generally led to more anteversion than the anterior approach. Use of robotics or navigation for acetabular positioning did not increase side-to-side variability in cup-related position or leg length. Despite considerable side-to-side variability, Hip dysfunction and osteoarthritis outcome scores (HOOS JR) were not affected by higher levels of position inconsistency. Staged, bilateral THA results in considerable variability in component position between sides. The anterior approach leads to more side-to-side variability in sagittal stem angle and cup anteversion than the posterior approach. Navigation and robotics do not improve the consistency of component position in bilateral THA. Variation in implant position was not associated with differences in PROMs, suggesting that despite variability, patients can tolerate these differences between sides

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of implant placement when using robotic assistance during total hip arthroplasty (THA). Patients and Methods. A total of 20 patients underwent a planned THA using preoperative CT scans and robotic-assisted software. There were nine men and 11 women (n = 20 hips) with a mean age of 60.8 years (. sd. 6.0). Pelvic and femoral bone models were constructed by segmenting both preoperative and postoperative CT scan images. The preoperative anatomical landmarks using the robotic-assisted system were matched to the postoperative 3D reconstructions of the pelvis. Acetabular and femoral component positions as measured intraoperatively and postoperatively were evaluated and compared. Results. The system reported accurate values for reconstruction of the hip when compared to those measured postoperatively using CT. The mean deviation from the executed overall hip length and offset were 1.6 mm (. sd. 2.9) and 0.5 mm (. sd. 3.0), respectively. Mean combined anteversion was similar and correlated between intraoperative measurements and postoperative CT measurements (32.5°, . sd. 5.9° versus 32.2°, . sd. 6.4°; respectively; R. 2. = 0.65; p < 0.001). There was a significant correlation between mean intraoperative (40.4°, . sd. 2.1°) acetabular component inclination and mean measured postoperative inclination (40.12°, . sd. 3.0°, R. 2. = 0.62; p < 0.001). There was a significant correlation between mean intraoperative version (23.2°, . sd. 2.3°), and postoperatively measured version (23.0°, . sd. 2.4°; R. 2. = 0.76; p < 0.001). Preoperative and postoperative femoral component anteversion were significantly correlated with one another (R. 2. = 0.64; p < 0.001). Three patients had CT scan measurements that differed substantially from the intraoperative robotic measurements when evaluating stem anteversion. Conclusion. This is the first study to evaluate the success of hip reconstruction overall using robotic-assisted THA. The overall hip reconstruction obtained in the operating theatre using robotic assistance accurately correlated with the postoperative component position assessed independently using CT based 3D modelling. Clinical correlation during surgery should continue to be practiced and compared with observed intraoperative robotic values. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1303–9

In-hospital length of stay (LOS) and discharge disposition following arthroplasty could act as surrogate measures for improvement in patient pathways, and have major cost saving implications for healthcare providers. With the ever-growing adoption of robotic technology in arthroplasty, we wished to evaluate its impact on LOS. The objectives of this study were to compare LOS and discharge disposition following robotic-arm assisted (RO THA) versus conventional technique Total Hip Arthroplasty (CO THA). This large-scale, single institution study included patients of any age undergoing primary THA (N = 1,732) for any cause between May 2019 and January 2023. Data extracted included patient demographics, LOS, need for Post Anaesthesia Care Unit (PACU) admission, anaesthesia type, readmission within 30 days and discharge dispositions. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were also employed to identify factors and patient characteristics related to delayed discharge. The median LOS in the RO THA group was 54 hours (34, 78) versus 60 (51, 100) in the CO THA group, p<0.001. Discharge disposition was comparable between the two groups. In the multivariate model, age, need for PACU admission, ASA score > 2, female gender, general anaesthesia and utilisation of the conventional technique were significantly associated with LOS > 2 days. Our study showed that robotic-arm assistance was associated with a shorter LOS in patients undergoing primary THA and no difference in discharge destination. Our results suggest that robotic-arm assistance could be advantageous in partly addressing the upsurge of hip arthroplasty procedures and the concomitant health care burden; however, this needs to be corroborated by long-term cost effectiveness analyses and data from randomised controlled studies

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the commonest and most successful orthopaedic procedures used for the management of end-stage arthritis. With the recent introduction of robotic-assisted joint replacement, Computed tomography (CT) has become part of required pre-operative planning. The aim of this study is to quantify and characterise incidental CT findings, their clinical significance, and their effect on the planned joint arthroplasty. All consecutive patients undergoing an elective TJA (total joint arthroplasty; hip or knee) were retrospectively identified, over a 4-year period (December 2019 and November 2023). Data documented and analysed included patient demographics, type of joint arthroplasty, CT findings, their clinical significance, as well as potential delays to the planned arthroplasty because of these findings and subsequent further investigation. A total of 987 patients (female: 514 patients (52.1%)) undergoing TJA were identified (THA: 444 patients (45.0%); TKA: 400 patients (40.5%); UKA: 143 patients (14.5%)). Incidental findings within imaged areas were identified in 227 patients (23.0%). Of these findings, 74 (7.5%) were significant, requiring further investigation or management, 40 (4.1%) of which represented potential malignancy and 4 (0.4%) resulting in a new cancer diagnosis. A single patient was found to have an aneurysm requiring urgent vascular intervention. Surgery was delayed for further investigation in 4 patients (0.4%). Significant findings were more frequent in THA patients (THA: 43 (9.7%) TKA/UKA: 31 (5.7%). Within our cohort, 74 (7.5%) patients had significant incidental findings that required further investigations or management, with 4 (0.4%) having a previously undiagnosed malignancy. We strongly advocate that all robotic arthroplasty planning CTs are reviewed and reported by a specialist, to avoid missing undiagnosed malignancies and other significant diagnoses

Hip precautions following total hip arthroplasty (THA) limits flexion, adduction and internal rotation, yet these precautions cause unnecessary psychological stress. This study aims to assess bony and implant impingement using virtual models from actual patient's bony morphology and spinopelvic parameters to deduce whether hip precautions are necessary with precise implant positioning in the Asian population. Individualized sitting and standing sacral slope data of robotic THAs performed at two tertiary referral centers in Hong Kong was inputted into the simulation system based on patients’ pre-operative sitting and standing lumbar spine X-rays. Three-dimensional dynamic models were reconstructed using the Stryker Mako THA 4.0 software to assess bony and implant impingement both anteriorly and posteriorly, with default cup placement at 40° inclination and 20° anteversion. Femoral anteversion followed individual patient's native version. A 36mm hip ball was chosen for all cups equal or above 48mm and 32mm for those below. Anterior impingement was assessed by hip flexion and posterior impingement was assessed by hip extension. 113 patients were included. At neutral rotation and adduction, no patients had anterior implant impingement at hip flexion of 100°. 1.7% had impingement at 110°, 3.5% had impingement at 120°, 9.7% had impingement at 130°. With 20° of internal rotation and adduction, 0.8% had anterior implant impingement at hip flexion of 90°, 7.1% had impingement at 100° and 18.5% had impingement at 110°. With the hip externally rotated by 20°, 0.8% of patients had posterior implant impingement, and 8.8% bony impingement at 0° extension. With enabling technology allowing accurate component positioning, hip precautions without limiting forward flexion in neutral position is safe given precise implant positioning and adequate osteophyte removal. Patients should only be cautioned about combined internal rotation, adduction with flexion

Aims. The primary aim of this study was to compare the hip-specific functional outcome of robotic assisted total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) with manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Secondary aims were to compare general health improvement, patient satisfaction, and radiological component position and restoration of leg length between rTHA and mTHA. Methods. A total of 40 patients undergoing rTHA were propensity score matched to 80 patients undergoing mTHA for OA. Patients were matched for age, sex, and preoperative function. The Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) were collected pre- and postoperatively (mean 10 months (SD 2.2) in rTHA group and 12 months (SD 0.3) in mTHA group). In addition, patient satisfaction was collected postoperatively. Component accuracy was assessed using Lewinnek and Callanan safe zones, and restoration of leg length were assessed radiologically. Results. There were no significant differences in the preoperative demographics (p ≥ 0.781) or function (p ≥ 0.383) between the groups. The postoperative OHS (difference 2.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1 to 4.8; p = 0.038) and FJS (difference 21.1, 95% CI 10.7 to 31.5; p < 0.001) were significantly greater in the rTHA group when compared with the mTHA group. However, only the FJS was clinically significantly greater. There was no difference in the postoperative EQ-5D (difference 0.017, 95% CI -0.042 to 0.077; p = 0.562) between the two groups. No patients were dissatisfied in the rTHA group whereas six were dissatisfied in the mTHA group, but this was not significant (p = 0.176). rTHA was associated with an overall greater rate of component positioning in a safe zone (p ≤ 0.003) and restoration of leg length (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Patients undergoing rTHA had a greater hip-specific functional outcome when compared to mTHA, which may be related to improved component positioning and restoration of leg length. However, there was no difference in their postoperative generic health or rate of satisfaction. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(1):22–30

With the approval of our institute, we reviewed all the robot-assisted hip revision during October 2019 and August 2021. MAKO joint arthroplasty system was used to perform the hip revision surgery. Seventy-one robot-assisted hip revision cases were included. Cup revisions were carried out in 68 patients while stem revisions were also carried out in 68 patients. Three types of registration techniques (extra acetabular bone surface based, liner based, metal shell based or cage surface based) on the acetabular side. The extra acetabular bone surface was the commonest used for registration (48/70, 68.6%, mean accuracy 0.37mm), followed by liner surface (11/70, 15.7%, mean accuracy 0.36mm), acetabulum cup (10/70, 14.3%, mean accuracy 0.37mm), and cage surface (1/70, 1.4%, accuracy 0.40mm). We succeeded cup registration and robotic arm guided cup insertion in all the cases. The average cup inclination and anteversion after revision were 40.87°±4.39° and 13.87°±4.24°, respectively. Cups in 62 cases (62/68, 91.2%) were within the Lewinnek safe zone while in 55 cases (55/68, 80.9%) were within the Callanan safe zone. The Mako robot-assisted system could bring favorable cup reconstruction in hip revision with acceptable surgical time and blood loss. Accurate registration could be achieved by different methods

Aims

Implant waste during total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a significant cost to the USA healthcare system. While studies have explored methods to improve THA cost-effectiveness, the literature comparing the proportions of implant waste by intraoperative technology used during THA is limited. The aims of this study were to: 1) examine whether the use of enabling technologies during THA results in a smaller proportion of wasted implants compared to navigation-guided and conventional manual THA; 2) determine the proportion of wasted implants by implant type; and 3) examine the effects of surgeon experience on rates of implant waste by technology used.

Aims. Accurate placement of the acetabular component during total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an important factor in the success of the procedure. However, the reported accuracy varies greatly and is dependent upon whether free hand or navigated techniques are used. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of an instrument system that incorporates 3D printed, patient-specific guides designed to optimise the placement of the acetabular component. Patients and Methods. A total of 100 consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled and the accuracy of placement of the acetabular component was measured using post-operative CT scans. Results. The mean absolute deviation from the planned inclination and anteversion was 3.9° (0.0° to 13.6°) and 3.6° (0.0° to 12.9°), respectively. In 91% of cases the planned target of +/-10° was achieved for both inclination and anteversion. Conclusion. Accurate placement of the acetabular component can be achieved using patient-specific guides and is superior to free hand techniques and comparable to navigated and robotic techniques. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1342–6

The purposes of this study were to review retrospectively the 10-year outcome of cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) using an active robot system in the femoral canal preparation for an anatomic short stem and navigation in the cup placement through a mini incision posterior approach. We reviewed all patients who underwent THA with this procedure in 53 hips between 2004 and 2007. There were no intraoperative fracture nor navigation- or robotic-related complications. All implant sizes were same as planned ones. All cases were followed up at least two years and all implants showed bone ingrowth stable according to the Engh's criteria. After then, six patients died of unrelated causes. Two patients (three hips) could not come to the 10-year follow-up examination. The remaining 44 hips were followed for 10 to 12 years (11 years on average). There is no dislocation. The average JOA hip score improved from 48 preoperatively to 96 at the final examination. On the postoperative x-ray measurements, the average cup radiographic inclination was 39° and the radiographic anteversion was 14°. There was no stem which showed more than 2° of varus or valgus alignment. There was no case who showed more than 5mm of limb length discrepancy. Postoperative CT images of 38 hips were obtained at 2 weeks. After matching the coordinates of the pelvis and femur with the preoperative planning, we got very small differences in alignment parameters between the measured values and the planed ones. The difference differences between the plan and measured values were −0.1° in cup inclination, −1.4° in cup anteversion, stem 0.5° in coronal alignment, 0.6° in stem sagittal alignment, and −1.6° in stem anteversion, respectively. We conclude that our robotic femoral preparation for a short anatomical stem and navigated cup placement thru a mini-posterior approach was safe and feasible without affecting the accuracy of the procedure. There were no long term adverse effect of the procedure