4.7 Article

Accuracy of cup position following robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty may be associated with surgical approach and pelvic tilt

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-86849-0

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study retrospectively analyzed 115 patients who underwent robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty to investigate the accuracy of cup placement and predictive risk factors for inaccurate cup positioning. The results showed that a posterior pelvic tilt and anterior surgical approach were significant predictive factors for inaccurate cup positioning in robot-assisted THA.
This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of cup placement and determine the predictive risk factors for inaccurate cup positioning in robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA). We retrospectively analyzed 115 patients who underwent robot-assisted THA between August 2018 and November 2019. Acetabular cup alignment and three-dimensional (3D) position were measured using pre- or postoperative computed tomography (CT) data. Absolute differences in cup inclination, anteversion, and 3D position were assessed, and their relation to preoperative factors was evaluated. The average measurement of the absolute differences was 1.8 degrees +/- 2.0 degrees (inclination) and 1.9 degrees +/- 2.3 degrees (anteversion). The average absolute difference in the 3D cup position was 1.1 +/- 1.2 mm (coronal plane) and 0.9 +/- 1.0 mm (axial plane). Multivariate analysis revealed that a posterior pelvic tilt [odds ratio (OR, 1.1; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.00-1.23] and anterior surgical approach (OR, 5.1; 95% CI, 1.69-15.38) were predictive factors for inaccurate cup positioning with robot-assisted THA. This is the first study to demonstrate the predictive risk factors (posterior pelvic tilt and anterior surgical approach) for inaccurate cup position in robot-assisted THA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available