A Radiological Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Techniques in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Adarsh Annapareddy; Praharsha Mulpur; Tarun Jayakumar; Chethan Shinde; Vemaganti Badri Narayana Prasad; A V Gurava Reddy

doi:10.1007/s43465-024-01232-1

A Radiological Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Techniques in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Indian J Orthop. 2024 Aug 17;58(10):1423-1430. doi: 10.1007/s43465-024-01232-1. eCollection 2024 Oct.

Authors

Adarsh Annapareddy¹, Praharsha Mulpur¹, Tarun Jayakumar¹, Chethan Shinde¹, Vemaganti Badri Narayana Prasad¹, A V Gurava Reddy¹

Affiliation

¹ Sunshine Bone and Joint Institute, KIMS-Sunshine Hospitals, Hyderabad, India.

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.

Keywords: Accuracy; Bone Ninja; Radiological measurement; Radiological outcomes; Robotic; Robotic vs. conventional; Total hip arthroplasty.

© Indian Orthopaedics Association 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.