Evaluation of Cup Placement Accuracy in Computer Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty

Overview

Journal Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

Specialties Emergency Medicine
General Surgery
Orthopedics

Date 2025 Mar 14

PMID 40085242

Authors

Hiroki Kaneta

Takeshi Shoji

Shinichi Ueki

Hiroyuki Morita

Yosuke Kozuma

Nobuo Adachi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) accuracy has improved significantly with various advances in computer-assisted equipment (CAE), including robotic systems, computed tomography (CT) navigation, and portable navigation. However, no studies have directly compared the accuracy of acetabular cup placement and its impact on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) across these three CAE systems. In this study, we aimed to evaluate cup placement accuracy and PROMs in THA using different CAE systems.

Methods: This retrospective analysis included 196 patients (202 hip joints) who underwent THA with three CAE systems from May 2021 to August 2023. Patients were categorized into the robotic system (73 hips), CT navigation (83 hips), and portable navigation (46 hips). Postoperative CT scans measured cup placement angles-radiographic inclination (RI) and radiographic anteversion (RA) -and compared them with preoperative target angles. Anterior-posterior (AP) cup position differences were evaluated by measuring the distance between the acetabular and cup center in the axial view of the postoperative CT scans. PROMs were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ) at 3 and 12 months.

Results: Demographic characteristics, including age, sex, primary disease, and Body Mass Index, were similar across groups. The robotic system exhibited significantly smaller deviations in ΔRI and ΔRA compared to CT navigation and portable navigation. AP cup position differences were also smaller in the robotic system versus portable navigation; however, the difference between the robotic and CT navigation systems was not statistically significant. Despite the superior precision of cup placement in the robotic system, no significant differences in JHEQ scores were observed among the groups at 3 and 12 months.

Conclusion: Robotic systems demonstrated superior accuracy in cup placement. However, short-term PROMs did not significantly differ, suggesting that PROMs may not solely depend on accurate cup placement. Future research should investigate additional factors influencing PROMs.

References

Learmonth I, Young C, Rorabeck C . The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet. 2007; 370(9597):1508-19. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60457-7. View

Lewinnek G, Lewis J, Tarr R, COMPERE C, Zimmerman J . Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978; 60(2):217-20. View

DLima D, Urquhart A, Buehler K, Walker R, Colwell Jr C . The effect of the orientation of the acetabular and femoral components on the range of motion of the hip at different head-neck ratios. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000; 82(3):315-21. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200003000-00003. View

Kennedy J, Rogers W, Soffe K, Sullivan R, Griffen D, Sheehan L . Effect of acetabular component orientation on recurrent dislocation, pelvic osteolysis, polyethylene wear, and component migration. J Arthroplasty. 1998; 13(5):530-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90052-3. View

Schmitz P, VAN Susante J, Hol A, Brokelman R, van Loon C . No decline in high patient satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty at long-term follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2018; 29(1):91-95. DOI: 10.1007/s00590-018-2243-6. View

Streit M, Innmann M, Merle C, Bruckner T, Aldinger P, Gotterbarm T . Long-term (20- to 25-year) results of an uncemented tapered titanium femoral component and factors affecting survivorship. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471(10):3262-9. PMC: 3773148. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3033-4. View

Ando W, Takao M, Hamada H, Uemura K, Sugano N . Comparison of the accuracy of the cup position and orientation in total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip between the Mako robotic arm-assisted system and computed tomography-based navigation. Int Orthop. 2021; 45(7):1719-1725. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-021-05015-3. View

Hasegawa M, Naito Y, Tone S, Wakabayashi H, Sudo A . Accuracy of acetabular cup insertion in an anterolateral supine approach using an accelerometer-based portable navigation system. J Artif Organs. 2020; 24(1):82-89. DOI: 10.1007/s10047-020-01206-8. View

Shibanuma N, Ishida K, Matsumoto T, Takayama K, Sanada Y, Kurosaka M . Early postoperative clinical recovery of robotic arm-assisted vs. image-based navigated Total hip Arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021; 22(1):314. PMC: 8008585. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04162-3. View

10.

Sato K, Sato A, Okuda N, Masaaki M, Koga H . A propensity score-matched comparison between Mako robotic arm-assisted system and conventional technique in total hip arthroplasty for patients with osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022; 143(5):2755-2761. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-022-04524-z. View

11.

Tanaka S, Takegami Y, Osawa Y, Okamoto M, Imagama S . Retrospective study comparing the accuracies of handheld infrared stereo camera and augmented reality-based navigation systems for total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024; 144(6):2811-2821. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05330-5. View

12.

Okamoto M, Takegami Y, Osawa Y, Tanaka S, Nobori T, Imagama S . Accelerometer-based portable navigation system shows no superior accuracy over pelvic alignment guide for acetabular cup placement in total hip arthroplasty in lateral decubitus position. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024; 144(11):4849-4856. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05571-4. View

13.

Fujita M, Hayashi S, Kuroda Y, Nakano N, Maeda T, Matsushita T . Accuracy comparison of cup positioning during total hip arthroplasty using Hip Align and AR-Hip in the supine position. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023; 143(12):7229-7235. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-023-04975-y. View

14.

Hayashi S, Kuroda Y, Nakano N, Matsumoto T, Kamenaga T, Tsubosaka M . Accuracy of portable navigation during THA in patients with severe developmental dysplasia of hip. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024; 144(5):2429-2435. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05338-x. View

15.

Pagkalos J, Chaudary M, Davis E . Navigating the reaming of the acetabular cavity in total hip arthroplasty: does it improve implantation accuracy?. J Arthroplasty. 2014; 29(9):1749-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.03.038. View

16.

Lin F, Lim D, Wixson R, Milos S, Hendrix R, Makhsous M . Limitations of imageless computer-assisted navigation for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010; 26(4):596-605. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.05.027. View

17.

Domb B, El Bitar Y, Sadik A, Stake C, Botser I . Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional acetabular cup placement in THA: a matched-pair controlled study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 472(1):329-36. PMC: 3889439. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3253-7. View

18.

Elmallah R, Cherian J, Jauregui J, Padden D, Harwin S, Mont M . Robotic-Arm Assisted Surgery in Total Hip Arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2015; 26:283-8. View

19.

Elson L, Dounchis J, Illgen R, Marchand R, Padgett D, Bragdon C . Precision of acetabular cup placement in robotic integrated total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int. 2015; 25(6):531-6. DOI: 10.5301/hipint.5000289. View

20.

Emara A, Zhou G, Klika A, Koroukian S, Schiltz N, Higuera-Rueda C . Is there increased value in robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty? : a nationwide outcomes, trends, and projections analysis of 4,699,894 cases. Bone Joint J. 2021; 103-B(9):1488-1496. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B9.BJJ-2020-2411.R1. View