Table 4 Studies comparing R-THA vs. C-THA
Author | Study Type / Number of Patients | Study Group 1 | Study Group 2 | Outcomes | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Shaw J.H. et al., [46] | Cohort Study/2247 hips | R-THA | C-THA | Number of dislocations and revision surgery for instability was noted. Minimum follow-up of 6 months duration. A representative sample of (368 hips) X-rays were assessed for cup anteversion and inclination. | Robotic group had reduced surgical duration, hospital stay and dislocation rates. Robotic group had greater anteversion, but less inclination than conventional THA. |
Stewart N.J. et al., [47] | Case-control study/200 hips | R-THA | Fluoroscopy assisted THA | Evaluation for cup placement within safe zones (Lewinnek and Callanan) | Greater percentage of cases from robotic group fell into safe zones as compared to fluoroscopy assisted groups. |
Li Y et al., [52] | Case-control study/246 hips | R-THA | C-THA | Evaluated for cup placement within safe zones(Lewinnek and Callanan). | No significant differences found in cup position within safe zone |
Foissey C et al., [17] | Case-control study/150 hips | R-THA | C-THA | Acetabular cup inclination, anteversion, offsets were measured. Harris hip score(HHS) and complications were assessed at 1 year. | Centre of rotation was more accurately restored with R-THA. No difference in functional outcome or complications at 1 year follow-up. |
Zhang S et al., [18] | Case-control study/116 hips | R-THA | C-THA | Acetabular cup inclination, anteversion, offsets were measured at 3, 6 and 12 months along with functional outcomes in obese patients. | Greater percentage of cases using R-THA achieved targeted angles as compared to C-THA. Functional outcomes were comparable in both groups. |
Domb B.G. et al., [19] | Case-control study/132 hips | R-THA | C-THA | Acetabular cup inclination, anteversion, offsets were measured. Functional outcomes were evaluated and had a minimum of 5 year follow-up. | Greater percentage of cases using R-THA were in safe zones as compared to C-THA group. Global offset and functional outcomes were also better with R-THA |
Wang W. et al., [48] | Prospective RCT/72 hips | R-THA | C-THA | Acetabular cup inclination, anteversion, offsets were measured. | Cup anteversion within safe zone was found to be better with R-THA, but no difference was noted in cup inclination. |