Surgical Technique of Cemented Acetabulum Component Insertion Using Robot Arm-assisted Surgery

IF 0.2 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Techniques in Orthopaedics Pub Date : 2023-09-27 DOI:10.1097/bto.0000000000000647
Sofia Marasco, Ross Crawford, Dirk van Bavel
{"title":"Surgical Technique of Cemented Acetabulum Component Insertion Using Robot Arm-assisted Surgery","authors":"Sofia Marasco, Ross Crawford, Dirk van Bavel","doi":"10.1097/bto.0000000000000647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Robotic arm-assisted surgery is becoming more widely used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) to aid surgeons in accurate component positioning. Surgical techniques describe cementless and hybrid THA implantation using robot arm-assisted systems, there is no description of cemented acetabular cup positioning and its use is considered off-label. Cemented THA has undergone technical and component improvement since the 1980s when studies first indicated high rates of loosening.1 Since this time, improved cementing techniques and cross-linked polyethylene cup introduction have demonstrated excellent results and improved survivorship.2,3 The Australian Joint Registry (AOANJRR)4 demonstrated that cemented THA has no difference from hybrid THA and a lower revision rate compared with cementless implants in the short term but with no difference long term. These results are not echoed in all registries as the later introduction of cross-linked polyethylene for cemented acetabular components compared with cementless creates a “polyethylene bias” when trying to interpret results. Since 2017, the AOANJRR has published data excluding non–cross-linked polyethylene articulations. Cemented acetabular cups are indicated for most patients who undergo THA but are particularly relevant for patients with poor quality acetabular bone stock (ie, osteoporosis and inflammatory arthritis or deficiencies that would lead to inadequate cementless fixation and revision of cup arthroplasty). These outcomes are maintained when surgeons maintain technique proficiency. The use of cemented acetabular implants also carries health and economic benefits with cemented implants costing significantly less than cementless acetabular components. The benefits extend into the postoperative period with decreased costs associated with reduced revision rates.5 We describe the surgical technique of cemented acetabular cup placement using the robot arm-assisted MAKO system (Stryker Kalamazoo). This technique is not currently described on the label, but it may be useful for surgeons who would like the benefit of haptic-controlled reaming and navigation of cemented cup implantation, as well as the potential benefits of the virtual range of motion impingement tool. TECHNIQUE Informed consent was obtained from the patient and the institution's ethical approval was obtained. Preoperative planning using the robot arm-assisted system is performed as though an uncemented acetabular component is being used. When the patient is placed in a lateral decubitus position, side support is placed at the sacral promontory and pubic bone, as a support on the anterior superior iliac spine leaves little sterile space between the post and iliac crest pins. (Fig. 1)FIGURE 1: Pelvic post against ASIS and pubic body. Note increased surgical field with post placed at the pubic body (Iliac crest marked with a dotted line and lower border of rib cage with solid line). ASIS indicate Anterior Superior Iliac Spine.Acetabular bone registration and reaming are carried out as per standard acetabular cup preparation for the robot arm-assisted system. Once the acetabulum is reamed a trial acetabular component 2 mm smaller than the final reamer is attached to the cup insertion handle and temporarily inserted into the acetabulum (leaving the handle attached). Once in the reduced position a recording is taken which is necessary for the MAKO software to progress with surgery and the window trial is removed. Further acetabular bone preparation is carried out as per the surgeons' usual technique. The author often eccentrically reams the superolateral manually with a small reamer to remove the sclerotic bone. As part of the surgical technique, lug holes are drilled into the 3 bones of the pelvis to increase the cross-sectional area of cement fixation. These are identified by changing the guidance module screen to computed tomography ream view. The planar probe can be used to identify each pelvic bone and guide lug hole placement. The author drills lug holes with the 9 mm acetabular step drill into the trabecular bone, taking care not to perforate the inner table of the acetabulum. (Fig. 2)FIGURE 2: Planar pointer positioning to determine pelvic bone.Once bone preparation is completed the final acetabular cup is cemented in place using a standard surgical technique (washing with pulse lavage, bone grafting the true floor, raytec temporarily in the lug holes to prevent hematoma, and the use of an ilial wing sucker). With the final acetabular component in place, before the cement sets, run the planar probe around the rim of the acetabular component to register 5 points using the surgical results feature under the final results tab. This will be recorded on the guidance system and give feedback regarding the acetabulum inclination and version. (Fig. 3)FIGURE 3: Rim of cup used for recording 5 points for acetabular position and registration of acetabular component positioning.Use a Howarth or Bristow to adjust the cup position, rechecking the position of the cup with the planar probe before the cement sets to obtain measurements as planned. This stage needs to be performed quickly to ensure the component is in the desired position before the cement sets. It is useful to practice with a trial component before cementing the definitive one in place. Once the cement has been set, the THA continues as a standard surgical procedure. EXPECTED OUTCOMES This method allows for the continuation of cemented acetabular components in modern arthroplasty, ensuring that this skill set is not, a concern with <3% of acetabular components cemented in Australian THA.4 Not only does this method continue to benefit the patient but also the health care system with decreased costs, a pertinent issue in a busy health care system with limited resources. The precise implantation of cemented acetabular components ensures preoperative planning and improved patient outcomes are maintained with the use of robot arm-assisted systems. One author has implanted 23 cemented cups using this technique, with a follow-up range of 1 to 4 years. All cups have been implanted within 3 degrees of planned inclination and anteversion. There have been no observed dislocations, revisions, or major complications. COMPLICATIONS Common complications, such as poor access and difficulty registering measurements, poor cement interdigitation, and cup positioning can be avoided by the techniques described. Access to the acetabulum and compromise of implant positioning can be avoided by positioning the patient as described. An increase in the surgical field allows for easy registration of measurements. Poor cement interdigitation of the acetabulum can affect acetabular cup stability, this can be reduced by drilling lug holes as described. Lug holes allow for greater cement interdigitation in the pelvis and increased cup stability. Improper positioning of the cemented implant can be prevented by using a Howarth or Bristow to adjust the cup position while the cement is being set. The position of the cup can be measured while the cement is set to ensure placement as planned. Cemented implants can be removed as per the surgeons' preferred technique.","PeriodicalId":45336,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Orthopaedics","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/bto.0000000000000647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Robotic arm-assisted surgery is becoming more widely used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) to aid surgeons in accurate component positioning. Surgical techniques describe cementless and hybrid THA implantation using robot arm-assisted systems, there is no description of cemented acetabular cup positioning and its use is considered off-label. Cemented THA has undergone technical and component improvement since the 1980s when studies first indicated high rates of loosening.1 Since this time, improved cementing techniques and cross-linked polyethylene cup introduction have demonstrated excellent results and improved survivorship.2,3 The Australian Joint Registry (AOANJRR)4 demonstrated that cemented THA has no difference from hybrid THA and a lower revision rate compared with cementless implants in the short term but with no difference long term. These results are not echoed in all registries as the later introduction of cross-linked polyethylene for cemented acetabular components compared with cementless creates a “polyethylene bias” when trying to interpret results. Since 2017, the AOANJRR has published data excluding non–cross-linked polyethylene articulations. Cemented acetabular cups are indicated for most patients who undergo THA but are particularly relevant for patients with poor quality acetabular bone stock (ie, osteoporosis and inflammatory arthritis or deficiencies that would lead to inadequate cementless fixation and revision of cup arthroplasty). These outcomes are maintained when surgeons maintain technique proficiency. The use of cemented acetabular implants also carries health and economic benefits with cemented implants costing significantly less than cementless acetabular components. The benefits extend into the postoperative period with decreased costs associated with reduced revision rates.5 We describe the surgical technique of cemented acetabular cup placement using the robot arm-assisted MAKO system (Stryker Kalamazoo). This technique is not currently described on the label, but it may be useful for surgeons who would like the benefit of haptic-controlled reaming and navigation of cemented cup implantation, as well as the potential benefits of the virtual range of motion impingement tool. TECHNIQUE Informed consent was obtained from the patient and the institution's ethical approval was obtained. Preoperative planning using the robot arm-assisted system is performed as though an uncemented acetabular component is being used. When the patient is placed in a lateral decubitus position, side support is placed at the sacral promontory and pubic bone, as a support on the anterior superior iliac spine leaves little sterile space between the post and iliac crest pins. (Fig. 1)FIGURE 1: Pelvic post against ASIS and pubic body. Note increased surgical field with post placed at the pubic body (Iliac crest marked with a dotted line and lower border of rib cage with solid line). ASIS indicate Anterior Superior Iliac Spine.Acetabular bone registration and reaming are carried out as per standard acetabular cup preparation for the robot arm-assisted system. Once the acetabulum is reamed a trial acetabular component 2 mm smaller than the final reamer is attached to the cup insertion handle and temporarily inserted into the acetabulum (leaving the handle attached). Once in the reduced position a recording is taken which is necessary for the MAKO software to progress with surgery and the window trial is removed. Further acetabular bone preparation is carried out as per the surgeons' usual technique. The author often eccentrically reams the superolateral manually with a small reamer to remove the sclerotic bone. As part of the surgical technique, lug holes are drilled into the 3 bones of the pelvis to increase the cross-sectional area of cement fixation. These are identified by changing the guidance module screen to computed tomography ream view. The planar probe can be used to identify each pelvic bone and guide lug hole placement. The author drills lug holes with the 9 mm acetabular step drill into the trabecular bone, taking care not to perforate the inner table of the acetabulum. (Fig. 2)FIGURE 2: Planar pointer positioning to determine pelvic bone.Once bone preparation is completed the final acetabular cup is cemented in place using a standard surgical technique (washing with pulse lavage, bone grafting the true floor, raytec temporarily in the lug holes to prevent hematoma, and the use of an ilial wing sucker). With the final acetabular component in place, before the cement sets, run the planar probe around the rim of the acetabular component to register 5 points using the surgical results feature under the final results tab. This will be recorded on the guidance system and give feedback regarding the acetabulum inclination and version. (Fig. 3)FIGURE 3: Rim of cup used for recording 5 points for acetabular position and registration of acetabular component positioning.Use a Howarth or Bristow to adjust the cup position, rechecking the position of the cup with the planar probe before the cement sets to obtain measurements as planned. This stage needs to be performed quickly to ensure the component is in the desired position before the cement sets. It is useful to practice with a trial component before cementing the definitive one in place. Once the cement has been set, the THA continues as a standard surgical procedure. EXPECTED OUTCOMES This method allows for the continuation of cemented acetabular components in modern arthroplasty, ensuring that this skill set is not, a concern with <3% of acetabular components cemented in Australian THA.4 Not only does this method continue to benefit the patient but also the health care system with decreased costs, a pertinent issue in a busy health care system with limited resources. The precise implantation of cemented acetabular components ensures preoperative planning and improved patient outcomes are maintained with the use of robot arm-assisted systems. One author has implanted 23 cemented cups using this technique, with a follow-up range of 1 to 4 years. All cups have been implanted within 3 degrees of planned inclination and anteversion. There have been no observed dislocations, revisions, or major complications. COMPLICATIONS Common complications, such as poor access and difficulty registering measurements, poor cement interdigitation, and cup positioning can be avoided by the techniques described. Access to the acetabulum and compromise of implant positioning can be avoided by positioning the patient as described. An increase in the surgical field allows for easy registration of measurements. Poor cement interdigitation of the acetabulum can affect acetabular cup stability, this can be reduced by drilling lug holes as described. Lug holes allow for greater cement interdigitation in the pelvis and increased cup stability. Improper positioning of the cemented implant can be prevented by using a Howarth or Bristow to adjust the cup position while the cement is being set. The position of the cup can be measured while the cement is set to ensure placement as planned. Cemented implants can be removed as per the surgeons' preferred technique.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机械臂辅助置入髋臼骨水泥假体的手术技术
机械臂辅助手术越来越广泛地应用于全髋关节置换术(THA),以帮助外科医生准确定位部件。手术技术描述了使用机械臂辅助系统的无骨水泥和混合THA植入,没有描述骨水泥髋臼杯定位,其使用被认为是标签外的。自20世纪80年代研究首次表明高松动率以来,骨水泥THA经历了技术和部件的改进从那时起,改进的固井技术和交联聚乙烯杯的引入证明了良好的效果,并提高了存活率。2,3澳大利亚联合注册(AOANJRR)4表明,骨水泥THA与混合THA在短期内没有差异,与无骨水泥植入物相比,翻修率较低,但长期没有差异。这些结果并没有在所有的注册中得到回应,因为在试图解释结果时,与无骨水泥相比,后来引入交联聚乙烯用于骨水泥髋臼部件会产生“聚乙烯偏差”。自2017年以来,AOANJRR发布了不包括非交联聚乙烯关节的数据。骨水泥臼杯适用于大多数接受全髋关节置换术的患者,但特别适用于髋臼骨质量差的患者(即骨质疏松症和炎症性关节炎或缺陷,这些缺陷会导致不充分的无骨水泥固定和髋臼杯置换术的翻修)。当外科医生保持技术熟练时,这些结果得以维持。使用骨水泥髋臼假体也具有健康和经济效益,因为骨水泥假体的成本明显低于无骨水泥髋臼假体。这些益处延伸到术后,降低了成本,降低了翻修率我们描述了使用机械臂辅助MAKO系统(Stryker Kalamazoo)置入骨水泥臼杯的手术技术。这项技术目前还没有在标签上描述,但它可能对外科医生有用,他们想要从触觉控制扩孔和导航的骨水泥杯植入中获益,以及虚拟运动范围撞击工具的潜在好处。技术已获得患者的知情同意和机构的伦理批准。使用机械臂辅助系统进行术前规划,就像使用未粘合的髋臼组件一样。当患者侧卧位时,侧支架放置于骶骨岬和耻骨处,因为髂前上棘上的支架在柱与髂骨钉之间留下很小的无菌空间。(图1)图1:盆腔支架对抗ASIS和耻体。注意耻骨柱置入后手术野增大(髂嵴用虚线标记,胸腔下缘用实线标记)。ASIS表示髂前上棘。根据机械臂辅助系统的标准髋臼杯准备进行髋臼骨配准和扩孔。一旦对髋臼进行扩孔,将一个比最终扩孔器小2mm的试验髋臼假体连接到杯插入柄上,并暂时插入髋臼(保留连接柄)。在复位位置进行记录,这是MAKO软件进行手术和移除窗口试验所必需的。进一步的髋臼骨准备按照外科医生通常的技术进行。作者经常用小铰刀手动偏心铰刀上外侧以去除硬化骨。作为手术技术的一部分,在骨盆的三块骨头上钻耳孔以增加水泥固定的截面积。通过将引导模块屏幕更改为计算机断层扫描组视图来识别这些。平面探头可用于识别每个骨盆骨并指导耳孔的放置。作者用9毫米的髋臼步钻在骨小梁上钻耳孔,注意不要刺穿髋臼内表。(图2)图2:平面指针定位测定骨盆骨。一旦骨准备完成,使用标准的外科技术将最终的髋臼杯固定到位(用脉冲冲洗,骨移植真底,在耳孔内暂时放置raytec以防止血肿,并使用髂翼吸盘)。在最终髋臼假体就位后,在水泥凝固前,将平面探针绕髋臼假体边缘放置,使用最终结果标签下的手术结果特征记录5个点。这将被记录在引导系统上,并给出关于髋臼倾斜和版本的反馈。(图3)图3:用于记录髋臼位置5点和髋臼构件定位的杯缘。 使用Howarth或Bristow调整杯的位置,在水泥凝固前用平面探头重新检查杯的位置,以获得计划的测量结果。这一阶段需要快速完成,以确保组件在水泥凝固前处于所需位置。在固定最终组件之前,用试验组件进行练习是很有用的。一旦骨水泥固定,THA作为标准手术程序继续进行。预期结果:该方法允许在现代关节置换术中继续使用骨水泥臼假体,确保这一技能组合不会成为澳大利亚tha中<3%的髋臼假体骨水泥的问题。4该方法不仅继续使患者受益,而且降低了医疗保健系统的成本,这是繁忙的医疗保健系统中资源有限的一个相关问题。通过使用机械臂辅助系统,精确植入骨水泥髋臼组件确保术前计划和改善患者预后。一位作者使用该技术植入了23个骨水泥杯,随访1至4年。所有的杯子都在计划的倾斜和前倾3度内植入。没有观察到脱位、修复或主要并发症。常见的并发症,如难以进入和难以记录测量,不良的水泥间指和杯定位可以通过所描述的技术来避免。按照上述方法对患者进行定位,可避免进入髋臼和损害植入物的定位。手术范围的增加使得测量的登记更加容易。髋臼骨水泥交错不良会影响髋臼杯的稳定性,这可以通过如上所述的钻孔来减少。耳孔允许骨盆内更大的骨水泥交错,增加杯的稳定性。在固定骨水泥时,可以使用Howarth或Bristow来调整杯的位置,以防止骨水泥种植体的不正确定位。在安装水泥时,可以测量杯子的位置,以确保按计划放置。骨水泥植入物可以根据外科医生的首选技术移除。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The purpose of Techniques in Orthopaedics is to provide information on the latest orthopaedic procedure as they are devised and used by top orthopaedic surgeons. The approach is technique-oriented, covering operations, manipulations, and instruments being developed and applied in such as arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and trauma. Each issue is guest-edited by an expert in the field and devoted to a single topic.
期刊最新文献
Perfect Circle Technique With C-arm Laser Augmentation Fixation of Distal Femur Fractures With the Use of Periarticular Tibial Locking Plates Single Incision Broström-Gould Surgery With Peroneal Debridement and Calcaneal Osteotomy Extensive Posteromedial Soft Tissue Release for Skeletally Mature Patients With Rigid Pes Cavus Deformity Kickstand Technique for Treatment of Valgus-Impacted Proximal Humerus Fractures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1