Preliminary study of short-term outcomes and learning curves of robotic-assisted THA: comparison between closed platform robotic system and open platform robotic system

Background Both closed platform and open platform robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA) have recently been recommended as a viable treatment option for achieving accurate positioning of components. Yet, limited studies paid attention to the differences between the closed platform robotic system and the open platform robotic system. Hence, this study aimed to investigate clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, complication rates and learning curve of two systems. Materials and methods We retrospectively included 62 patients (31 closed robotic system and 31 open robotic system) who underwent THA between February 2021 and January 2023. The demographics, operating time, cup positioning, complications and hip Harris score were evaluated. Learning curves of operation time was conducted using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Results There were no differences in surgical time (76.7 +/- 12.1 min vs. 72.3 +/- 14.8 min), estimated blood loss (223.2 +/- 13.2 ml vs. 216.9 +/- 17 ml) and Harris Hip score (HHS) between closed platform robotic system and the open platform robotic system. The closed robotic system and the open robotic system were associated with a learning curve of 9 cases and 7 cases for surgical time respectively, based on the satisfying rate of Lewinnek's safe zone outliers (1/31, 96.8%) and no occurrence of complication. Both robotic systems had significant reduction in overall surgical time, the duration of acetabulum registration, and estimated blood loss between learning phase and proficiency phase. Conclusion The authors suggest that the surgical outcomes and safe zone outlier rate of the open robotic-assisted THA were similar to those of the closed robotic-assisted THA. These two robotic-assisted are associated with comparable learning curves and both have the precise positioning of acetabular component. From learning phase to proficiency phase, the rate of positions within the safe zone differed only marginally (88.9-100% vs. 85.7-100%) based on a rather low number of patients. This is not a statistically significant difference. Therefore, we suggest that THA undergoing with the robotic-assisted system is the relatively useful way to achieve planned acetabular cup position so far.

Automated summary

This study compared the clinical outcomes between closed platform robotic system and open platform robotic system for total hip arthroplasty. Results showed that there were no significant differences in surgical time, estimated blood loss, and Harris Hip score between the two systems. Both robotic systems displayed similar learning curves and precise positioning of the acetabular component.