Abstract:Introduction Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful orthopaedic procedures. Survival rates from 90% at 10 years to 93% at 20 years have been reported in different studies. Differences in implant and patient characteristics can undoubtedly explain some of this variability observed in prosthesis durability, but the effect of surgical technique and implant orientation cannot be ignored. Therefore, many intraoperative methods (anatomic landmarks, intraoperative x-ray, fluoroscopy, navigation, and robotic surgery) have been attempted to avoid acetabular component malpositioning. Although postoperative computed tomography (CT) is accepted as the gold standard for the measurement of acetabular anteversion, it remains controversial in respect of costs and radiation exposure. The aim of this study was to examine how acetabular component orientation was affected in robotic and conventional THA operations performed by two surgeons with right-hand dominance. Material and methods The study included 113 primary THA operations performed on 113 patients between 2017 and 2022 in two groups: (i) robotic THA (Mako, Stryker Corporation, Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States) (55 patients) and (ii) conventional THA (58 patients). The patients comprised 51 males and 62 females. THA was performed on 54 right-side hips and 59 left-side hips. The operations were performed by two orthopaedic surgeons, each with 20 years of arthroplasty experience, on all the patients in the lateral decubitus position with an anterolateral approach. In all the cases, the orientation of the acetabular component was 40° inclination and 20° anteversion. Difficult THA procedures (patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), a history of hip surgery, revision THA, defect or deformity of the acetabulum, a history of scoliosis or lumbar posterior surgery, or those requiring proximal femoral osteotomy) were excluded from the study. Using the Liaw and Lewinnek methods, the acetabular component anteversion was measured on the radiographs taken in the optimal position postoperatively and the acetabular cup inclination angles were measured on the pelvis radiographs. The groups were compared using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Pearson Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U statistical tests. The limits were accepted as 40±5° for inclination and 20±5° for anteversion. Results No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of age, gender, or operated side. No statistically significant difference was determined between the optimal acetabular cup inclination angles of the robotic and conventional THA groups (p = 0.79). No statistically significant difference was determined between the optimal acetabular cup anteversion angles of the left and right conventional THA groups. Statistically significantly better results were determined in the robotic group in respect of acetabular cup anteversion (p<0,001). Conclusion The optimal orientation of the acetabular component is a key factor for successful THA. Otherwise, revision surgery is inevitable for reasons such as instability, impingement, or increased wear. The results of this study demonstrated that robotic surgery was superior to the conventional method in the placement of the acetabular component in the desired orientation.

The influence of the surgeon's handedness and standing position at the operating table on the radiological outcomes in primary total knee arthroplasty

Preoperative evaluation of femoral and tibial sagittal alignment in robotic-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty and consequences for practice

[Effect of the Surgical Time and Coronalmechanical Alignment after Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Computer Navigation System, Traditionalor 3D Printing Patient-Specific Instruments].

Differences in joint line level and posterior condylar offset during total knee replacement with use of gap-balancing and measured resection techniques-matched cohort study

No Difference in Limb Alignment Between Kinematic and Mechanical Alignment Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty

Effect of joint line orientation parameters on initial bone resection in mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective clinicoradiological correlation study

Radiological measurement of posterior tibial subluxation as a preoperative factor in choosing the type of implant in primary total knee arthroplasty

The effect of different alignment strategies on trochlear orientation after total knee arthroplasty

[Comparison of Alignment and Position of Prosthesis Between Portable Accelerometer-Based Navigation Device and Conventional Instrumentation in Total Knee Arthroplasty with Valgus Deformity].

Sparse and inconsistent reporting of pre‐ and post‐operative radiographic angles of total knee arthroplasty using true unrestricted kinematic alignment: An umbrella review and secondary meta‐analysis

The Effects of Surgical Technique in Total Knee Arthroplasty for Varus Osteoarthritic Knee on the Rotational Alignment of Femoral Component: Gap Balancing Technique versus Measured Resection Technique

Influence of the angle between tibial and prosthesis mechanical axes on tibial bone remodeling in total knee arthroplasty

Effect of limb rotation on radiographic alignment in total knee arthroplasties

Quantitative Analysis of Rotational Alignment after Total Knee Arthroplasty in Osteoarthritis

[Effect of femoral component rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty by using 3D-printed patient-specific instruments: a prospective randomized control study].

Factors Causing Unintended Sagittal and Axial Alignment Changes in High Tibial Osteotomy: Comparative 3-Dimensional Analysis of Simulation and Actual Surgery

Effect of 3D Printed Patient-Specific Cutting Guide on Patellar Height and Joint Line Position in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Radiographic Changes of Knee Alignment in Contralateral Knee After Unilateral Total Knee Arthroplastyin Knee Osteoarthritis Patients

Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Avoid Crossing Over From Varus to Valgus

[Influence of preoperative range of motion on the early clinical outcome of total knee arthroplasty].

Is the Acetabular Cup Orientation Different in Robot-Assisted and Conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty With Right-Handed Surgeons Using an Anterolateral Approach?