Dislocation risk after robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty: a comparison of anterior, lateral and posterolateral approaches.

AIMS: Dislocation is a major cause of early failure after THA and is highly influenced by surgical approach and component positioning. Robotic-arm assisted arthroplasty has been developed in an attempt to improve component positioning and reduce postoperative complications.The purpose of this study was to compare the rate of dislocation after robotic total hip arthroplasty through 3 different surgical approaches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who had undergone robotic arm-assisted THA at 3 centres between 2014 and 2019 were reviewed. After applying exclusion criteria, 1059 patients were included in the study. An anterior approach was used in 323 patients, a lateral approach in 394 and a posterior approach in 342 patients.Episodes of dislocation were recorded after 6 months follow-up. Stem anteversion, cup anteversion, cup inclination and combined anteversion were collected using the integrated navigation system.Cumulative incidence (CI), incidence rate (IR) and risk ratio (RR) were calculated with a confidence interval of 95%. RESULTS: 3 cases of dislocation (2 posterior approach, 1 anterior approach) were recorded, with a dislocation rate of 0.28% and an IR of 0.14%.The rate of placement of the cup in the Lewinnek safe zone was 82.2% for the posterior approach, 82.0% for the lateral approach and 95.4% for the anterior approach.The rate of placement in the combined version safe zone was 98.0% for the posterior approach, 73.0% for the lateral approach and 47.1% for the anterior approach.The incidence rate of dislocation was 0.30% for the anterior approach, 0.34% for the posterior approach and 0% for the lateral approach. CONCLUSIONS: The robotic arm-assisted technique is associated with a low risk of dislocation. The combined version technique appears to be a reliable way to reduce the risk of dislocation through the posterolateral approach but does not appear to be essential when using the lateral and anterior approaches.

Evaluation of Native Femoral Neck Version and Final Stem Version Variability in Patients With Osteoarthritis Undergoing Robotically Implanted Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Combined anteversion in total hip arthroplasty influences both dislocation risk and range of motion. One of its components, stem version (SV), could be dictated by many factors, from native femoral anatomy to stem geometry and surgeon's choice. In the present multicenter study, robotic technology was used to assess the influence of native femoral version on final SV and combined anteversion using a straight, uncemented stem. METHODS: Three hundred sixty-two patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty were enrolled from 3 different orthopedic centers from 2012 and 2016. All patients underwent computed tomography planning with measurement of femoral neck version (FNV) and intraoperative measurement of stem version (SV), acetabular component version (AV), and combined version (CV) with robotic instrumentation. RESULTS: Mean FNV was 5.0° ± 9.6°, and SV was 6.4° ± 9.7°. The average difference between FNV and SV was 1.6° ± 9.8°. A moderate correlation was found between FNV and SV (R = 0.48, P < .001). SV was between 5° and 20° in 174 patients (48%). Mean CV was 28.2° ± 7.9°. A strong correlation was found between SV and CV (R = 0.89, P < .001). A significant difference in SV was found between the 3 centers (P < .001). CV was <25° in 109 patients (30.1%). Relative risk of CV < 25° was 8.6 times greater with SV < 5° (P < .001). CONCLUSION: With the use of an uncemented, single-wedge, straight stem, SV is highly variable. Despite being moderately correlated with native FNV, SV can be partially influenced by the surgeon. A low SV could be hardly corrected, bringing high risk of low CV.