Possibilities of robot-assisted hip joint replacement in dysplasia

Background. Acetabular dysplasia creates significant technical difficulties in total hip arthroplasty due to anatomical features and bone tissue deficiency for placement of endoprosthesis components. The use of robot-assisted technologies opens up new opportunities to improve the accuracy of surgical interventions in this pathology. Objective. To conduct a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of robot-assisted and traditional manual methods of total hip arthroplasty in patients with dysplastic coxarthrosis.

Materials and methods. A prospective study of one hundred total hip arthroplasty operations for dysplastic coxarthrosis was conducted from 2023 to 2025. Patients were randomized into two groups of fifty people. The first group was operated on using the traditional manual method, the second - using the robot-assisted MAKO Robot system through a modified anterolateral approach according to Harding. All patients underwent a comprehensive preoperative examination, including pain assessment using the VAS scale, quality of life using the SF-36 questionnaire, and an X-ray examination to determine the degree of dysplasia according to the Crowe classification. Patients in the second group additionally underwent computed tomography using a special protocol for three-dimensional modeling. Control examinations were carried out three, six and twelve months after the operation.

Results. The robot-assisted technique ensured the accuracy of positioning of the endoprosthesis components with a deviation of no more than one millimeter and one degree from the preoperative plan. The period of using crutches was reduced from three months with the manual technique to six weeks with the robot-assisted approach. The duration of hospitalization was reduced from six to three days. One year after the operation, the VAS score was zero in the robot-assisted hip replacement group versus two points in the manual method group. The quality of life according to the SF-36 questionnaire reached ninety-five points versus eighty points, respectively. No complications were registered in either group.

Conclusion: Robot-assisted hip replacement for dysplasia demonstrates significant advantages over traditional methods, including high accuracy of component positioning, shorter rehabilitation period, and improved quality of life for patients. This technology can be considered as a method of choice for the treatment of dysplastic coxarthrosis with the prospect of widespread implementation in clinical practice.

1. Ma M., Cao Z., Yang M., et al. The invasiveness of robot-assisted total hip replacement is similar to that of conventional surgery. J Robot Surg. 2023;17(6):2987-2993. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01740-6.

2. Prinos A., Buehring W., Di Gangi C., et al. Robot-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty Demonstrates Improved 90-Day Clinical and PatientReported Outcomes. Arthroplast Today. 2024;27:101393. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101393.

3. Zhang X., Shen X., Zhang R., et al. Radiographic evaluation of robotassisted versus manual total hip arthroplasty: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Traumatol. 2024;25(1):33. DOI: 10.1186/s10195-024-00773-3.

4. Dretakis K., Raptis K., Koutserimpas C. The Use of the Robotic ArmAssisted System (MAKO) for Hip Revision Surgery. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2024;12(8):608-611. DOI: 10.22038/ABJS.2024.77543.3582.

5. Hoskins T., Begley B., Giacalone J.D., et al. MakoTM robotic-armassisted total hip and total knee arthroplasty outcomes in an orthopedic oncology setting: A case series. J Orthop. 2023;46:70-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2023.10.021.

6. Wang Y., Ji B., Chen Y., Li G. Short-term effectiveness of MAKO robot assisted complex total hip arthroplasty. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022;36(5):555-560. DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.202109054.

7. Lu H., Sun H., Xiao Q., et al. Perioperative safety and efficacy of robotassisted total hip arthroplasty in ERAS-managed patients: a pilot study. J Orthop Surg Res. 2023;18(1):696. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04180-y.

8. Singh A., Kotzur T., Peng L., et al. Robot-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty is Associated With an Increased Risk of Periprosthetic Fracture. J Arthroplasty. 2024;39(9S2):S353-S358. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2024.06.051.

9. Cui K., Guo X., Chen Y., et al. A comparative study of MAKO robotic arm assisted total hip arthroplasty and traditional total hip arthroplasty through posterolateral approach. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2020;34(7):883-888. DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.201911077.

10. Llombart-Blanco R., Mariscal G., Barrios C., et al. MAKO robotassisted total hip arthroplasty: a comprehensive meta-analysis of efficacy and safety outcomes. J Orthop Surg Res. 2024;19(1):698. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-05199-5.

11. Gerasenkova A.D., Orletsky A.K., Shumsky A.A. Learning curve for robot-assisted joint arthroplasty using the Stryker Mako system. Modern Problems of Science and Education. 2024;(3):13. DOI: 10.17513/spno.33420

12. Pimancev O.V., Ryapolov Yu.V., Nebelas R.P. et al. Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty. Pirogov National Medical and Surgical Center Bulletin. 2022;17(2):125-128. DOI: 10.25881/20728255_2022_17_2_125

13. Kharchenko V.V., Polskoy V.S., Shatokhina A.A. Anatomical aspects of hip arthroplasty in dysplasia. Integrative Trends in Medicine and Education. 2022;2:208-213. EDN FXCKDZ

14. Nasirli D.A. Surgical strategy for optimization of total hip arthroplasty technology. Surgery. Eastern Europe. 2022;11(4):558-570. DOI: 10.34883/PI.2022.11.4.021

15. Degtyarev D.A., Samoday V.G. Certificate of state registration of the database No. 2024622262 Russian Federation. Hip arthroplasty: access selection for functional outcome improvement. No. 2024621642: filed 20.04.2024: publ. 24.05.2024. EDN VVFTUH