Abstract
Robotic surgery in the field of trauma and orthopedics is an emerging science. Currently only a handful of centers are using robotic surgery worldwide, although in other specialties such as urology and gynecology, robots are used much more commonly. Robotic surgery is associated with precision bone cuts and optimum positioning of implants. This has the potential of improving recovery times and patient outcomes. There are two main types of robotic surgery: Haptic and autonomous systems. Haptic computers are used more commonly in orthopedics. Currently robotic surgery is used mainly in joint reconstruction and spine surgery. This chapter outlines the current use of robotic surgery in trauma and orthopedics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Lonner JH. Robotically assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with a handheld image-free sculpting tool. Orthop Clin North Am. 2016;47(1):29–40.
Bargar WL. Robots in orthopaedic surgery: past, present, and future. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;463:31–6.
Specht LM, Koval KJ. Robotics and computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery. Bull Hosp Jt Dis. 2001;60(3-4):168–72.
Karthik K, Colegate-Stone T, Dasgupta P, Tavakkolizadeh A, Sinha J. Robotic surgery in trauma and orthopaedics: a systematic review. Bone Joint J. 2015;97b(3):292–9.
Davies PBL. Orthopaedic robotic surgery. J Trauma Orthop. 2017;05(03):2.
Lang JE, Mannava S, Floyd AJ, Goddard MS, Smith BP, Mofidi A, et al. Robotic systems in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(10):1296–9.
Cobb J, Henckel J, Gomes P, Harris S, Jakopec M, Rodriguez F, et al. Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. J Bone Joint Surg. 2006;88(2):188–97.
Swank ML, Alkire M, Conditt M, Lonner JH. Technology and cost-effectiveness in knee arthroplasty: computer navigation and robotics. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2009;38(2 Suppl):32–6.
Blyth MJG, Anthony I, Rowe P, Banger MS, MacLean A, Jones B. Robotic arm-assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: exploratory secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint Res. 2017;6(11):631–9.
Kim SM, Park YS, Ha CW, Lim SJ, Moon YW. Robot-assisted implantation improves the precision of component position in minimally invasive TKA. Orthopedics. 2012;35(9):e1334–9.
Song EK, Seon JK, Yim JH, Netravali NA, Bargar WL. Robotic-assisted TKA reduces postoperative alignment outliers and improves gap balance compared to conventional TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(1):118–26.
Park SE, Lee CT. Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional manual implantation of a primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2007;22(7):1054–9.
Davenport D, Kavarthapu V. Computer navigation of the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty: a narrative review. EFORT Open Rev. 2016;1(7):279–85.
Domb BG, El Bitar YF, Sadik AY, Stake CE, Botser IB. Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional acetabular cup placement in THA: a matched-pair controlled study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(1):329–36.
Domb BG, Redmond JM, Louis SS, Alden KJ, Daley RJ, LaReau JM, et al. Accuracy of component positioning in 1980 total hip arthroplasties: a comparative analysis by surgical technique and mode of guidance. J Arthroplast. 2015;30(12):2208–18.
Nishihara S, Sugano N, Nishii T, Miki H, Nakamura N, Yoshikawa H. Comparison between hand rasping and robotic milling for stem implantation in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2006;21(7):957–66.
Schulz AP, Seide K, Queitsch C, von Haugwitz A, Meiners J, Kienast B, et al. Results of total hip replacement using the Robodoc surgical assistant system: clinical outcome and evaluation of complications for 97 procedures. Int J Med Robot. 2007;3(4):301–6.
Isik C, Apaydin N, Acar HI, Cay N, Firat A, Bozkurt M. Robotic hip arthroscopy: a cadaveric feasibility study. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2014;48(2):207–11.
Shaw KA, Murphy JS, Devito DP. Accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: is triggered electromyographic pedicle screw stimulation necessary? J Spine Surg. 2018;4(2):187–94.
Macke JJ, Woo R, Varich L. Accuracy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the pediatric population. J Robot Surg. 2016;10(2):145–50.
van Dijk JD, van den Ende RP, Stramigioli S, Kochling M, Hoss N. Clinical pedicle screw accuracy and deviation from planning in robot-guided spine surgery: robot-guided pedicle screw accuracy. Spine. 2015;40(17):E986–91.
Bozkurt M, Apaydin N, Isik C, Bilgetekin YG, Acar HI, Elhan A. Robotic arthroscopic surgery: a new challenge in arthroscopic surgery Part-I: robotic shoulder arthroscopy; a cadaveric feasibility study. Int J Med Robot. 2011;7(4):496–500.
Facca S, Hendriks S, Mantovani G, Selber JC, Liverneaux P. Robot-assisted surgery of the shoulder girdle and brachial plexus. Semin Plast Surg. 2014;28(1):39–44.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rahman, J., Al-Tawil, K., Khan, W.S. (2019). Use of Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Orthopedics. In: Iyer, K., Khan, W. (eds) General Principles of Orthopedics and Trauma. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15089-1_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15089-1_30
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-15088-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-15089-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)