Literature DB >> 27325369

Robotics in Arthroplasty: A Comprehensive Review.

David J Jacofsky1, Mark Allen1.   

Abstract

Robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery has been available clinically in some form for over 2 decades, claiming to improve total joint arthroplasty by enhancing the surgeon's ability to reproduce alignment and therefore better restore normal kinematics. Various current systems include a robotic arm, robotic-guided cutting jigs, and robotic milling systems with a diversity of different navigation strategies using active, semiactive, or passive control systems. Semiactive systems have become dominant, providing a haptic window through which the surgeon is able to consistently prepare an arthroplasty based on preoperative planning. A review of previous designs and clinical studies demonstrate that these robotic systems decrease variability and increase precision, primarily focusing on component positioning and alignment. Some early clinical results indicate decreased revision rates and improved patient satisfaction with robotic-assisted arthroplasty. The future design objectives include precise planning and even further improved consistent intraoperative execution. Despite this cautious optimism, many still wonder whether robotics will ultimately increase cost and operative time without objectively improving outcomes. Over the long term, every industry that has seen robotic technology be introduced, ultimately has shown an increase in production capacity, improved accuracy and precision, and lower cost. A new generation of robotic systems is now being introduced into the arthroplasty arena, and early results with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty have demonstrated improved accuracy of placement, improved satisfaction, and reduced complications. Further studies are needed to confirm the cost effectiveness of these technologies.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blue Belt; Mako; Robodoc; arthroplasty; robot; robotic-assisted surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27325369     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.05.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  61 in total

1.  The effectiveness of robotic hip and knee arthroplasty on patient-reported outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sascha Karunaratne; Michael Duan; Evangelos Pappas; Brett Fritsch; Richard Boyle; Sanjeev Gupta; Paul Stalley; Mark Horsley; Daniel Steffens
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-09-15       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Robotic unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a commentary on a recently published level 1 study.

Authors:  Alexander H Jinnah; Ashley Multani; Riyaz H Jinnah; Johannes F Plate
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-10

3.  [Digitalization and artificial intelligence in orthopedics and traumatology].

Authors:  K Harren; F Dittrich; F Reinecke; M Jäger
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Robotic-assisted versus standard unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-evaluation of manuscript conflict of interests, funding, scientific quality and bibliometrics.

Authors:  Leonardo Cavinatto; Michael J Bronson; Darwin D Chen; Calin S Moucha
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-10-05       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  New technique: practical procedure of robotic arm-assisted (MAKO) total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jianghui Qin; Zhihong Xu; Jin Dai; Dongyang Chen; Xingquan Xu; Kai Song; Dongquan Shi; Qing Jiang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-09

6.  CORR Insights®: Does Robotic Milling For Stem Implantation in Cementless THA Result in Improved Outcomes Scores or Survivorship Compared with Hand Rasping? Results of a Randomized Trial at 10 Years.

Authors:  Michael Tanzer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Does Robotic Milling For Stem Implantation in Cementless THA Result in Improved Outcomes Scores or Survivorship Compared with Hand Rasping? Results of a Randomized Trial at 10 Years.

Authors:  Nobuo Nakamura; Nobuhiko Sugano; Takashi Sakai; Ichiro Nakahara
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 8.  Robotics in orthopaedic surgery: why, what and how?

Authors:  Bernardo Innocenti; Edoardo Bori
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 9.  Concepts and techniques of a new robotically assisted technique for total knee arthroplasty: the ROSA knee system.

Authors:  Cécile Batailler; Didier Hannouche; Francesco Benazzo; Sébastien Parratte
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 3.067

10.  The trends in robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty: A statewide database study.

Authors:  Qais Naziri; Steven A Burekhovich; Patrick J Mixa; Robert Pivec; Jared M Newman; Neil V Shah; Preetesh D Patel; Akhilesh Sastry
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-05-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.