Robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty enables accurate cup orientation and positioning in obese patients with osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip: a propensity score-matched comparative study
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2026
Robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty enables accurate cup orientation and positioning in obese patients with osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip: a propensity score-matched comparative study
This study evaluated the accuracy of cup placement by the robotic arm-assisted system (Mako) in obese patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).
Methods:
This retrospective single-centre study included 923 consecutive hips with primary robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA). After propensity score-matching, 80 hips with DDH each were selected for the obese group and non-obese group. Postoperative cup orientation and positioning were assessed by superimposition of a 3-dimensional cup template, using postoperative computed tomography images with pelvic coordinates matching the preoperative planning.
Results:
The absolute error of cup inclination and anteversion was comparable between the obese and non-obese groups (1.2 ± 1.0° vs. 1.2 ± 1.0° and 1.4 ± 1.0° vs. 1.6 ± 1.2°, respectively). The absolute error of the transverse, sagittal, and longitudinal axes between the obese and non-obese groups were 1.0 ± 0.9 mm vs. 1.4 ± 1.0 mm, 1.5 ± 1.0 mm vs. 1.3 ± 1.8 mm, and 1.4 ± 1.2 mm vs. 1.3 ± 0.9 mm (p = 0.02, p = 0.89, and p = 0.12, respectively). There was no significant difference in cup orientation or positioning in the obese group, regardless of body mass index.
Conclusions:
Robotic arm-assisted THA enables accurate cup placement even in obese patients with DDH.
EthgenOBruyèreORichyF, et al. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am2004; 86: 963–974.
2.
OmichiYGotoTWadaK, et al. Impact of the hip-spine relationship and patient-perceived leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective study. J Orthop Sci2024; 29: 854–860.
3.
StirlingPViamont-GuerraMRStromL, et al. Does cup position at the high hip center or anatomic hip center in THA for developmental dysplasia of the hip result in better Harris Hip Scores and revision incidence? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res2021; 479: 1119–1130.
4.
MiuraTYamamotoNShiroshitaA, et al. Comparison of implant placement accuracy between manual, robot-assisted, computer-navigated, augmented reality navigated, patient-specific instrumentation, and accelerometer navigated total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. JBJS Rev2024; 12: e24.00120.
5.
LuuKNishiokaSTLawtonDRY, et al. Influence of obesity and intra-operative imaging guidance technology on acetabular cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2023; 143: 6857–6863.
6.
CharalambousAPincusDHighS, et al. Association of surgical experience with risk of complication in total hip arthroplasty among patients with severe obesity. JAMA Netw Open2021; 4: e2123478.
7.
CallananMCJarrettBBragdonCR, et al. The John Charnley Award: risk factors for cup malpositioning: quality improvement through a joint registry at a tertiary hospital. Clin Orthop Relat Res2011; 469: 319–329.
8.
ElsonLCBarrCJChandranSE, et al. Are morbidly obese patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty at an increased risk for component malpositioning?J Arthroplasty2013; 28(Suppl.): 41–44.
9.
BarrackRLKrempecJAClohisyJC, et al. Accuracy of acetabular component position in hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2013; 95: 1760–1768.
10.
FontalisAKayaniBPlastowR, et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing CT-based planning with conventional total hip arthroplasty versus robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J2024; 106-B: 324–335.
11.
TamakiYGotoTWadaK, et al. Robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty via a minimally invasive anterolateral approach in the supine position improves the precision of cup placement in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Orthop Sci2024; 29: 559–565.
12.
KonishiTSatoTHamaiS, et al. Robotic arm-assisted system improved accuracy of cup position and orientation in cementless total hip arthroplasty for dysplastic hips: a comparison among groups with manual placement, computed tomography-based navigation, and robotic surgery. Arthroplast Today2024; 28: 101461.
13.
SatoKSatoAOkudaN, et al. A propensity score-matched comparison between Mako robotic arm-assisted system and conventional technique in total hip arthroplasty for patients with osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2023; 143: 2755–2761.
14.
GuptaARedmondJMHammarstedtJE, et al. Does robotic-assisted computer navigation affect acetabular cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty in the obese patient? A comparison study. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 2204–2207.
15.
YuCZhangZLiuC, et al. Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty outperforms manual technique in obese and overweight patients: a prospective comparative study. J Orthop Surg Res2024; 19: 639.
16.
RogersBAGarbedianSKuchinadRA, et al. Total hip arthroplasty for adult hip dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg Am2012; 94: 1809–1821.
17.
AndoWTakaoMHamadaH, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of the cup position and orientation in total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip between the Mako robotic arm-assisted system and computed tomography-based navigation. Int Orthop2021; 45: 1719–1725.
18.
HayashiSHashimotoSKurodaY, et al. Robotic-arm assisted THA can achieve precise cup positioning in developmental dysplasia of the hip: a case control study. Bone Joint Res2021; 10: 629–638.
19.
SuganoNMaedaYFujiH, et al. Accuracy of femoral component anteversion in robotic total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J2024; 106-B(Suppl. A): 104–109.
20.
MurrayDW.The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br1993; 75: 228–232.
21.
HepinstallMSCodenGSalemHS, et al. Consideration of pelvic tilt at the time of preoperative planning improves standing acetabular position after robotic-arm assisted total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int2023; 33: 47–52.
22.
OkazakiTImagamaTMatsukiY, et al. Accuracy of robotic arm-assisted versus computed tomography-based navigation in total hip arthroplasty using the direct anterior approach: a retrospective study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2024; 25: 787.
23.
ZhangSLiuYYangM, et al. Robotic-assisted versus manual total hip arthroplasty in obese patients: a retrospective case-control study. J Orthop Surg Res2022; 17: 368.
24.
DeMikDEBedardNADowdleSB, et al. Complications and obesity in arthroplasty-a hip is not a knee. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 3281–3287.
25.
GohGSZengGJTayDK, et al. Does obesity lead to lower rates of clinically meaningful improvement or satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty? A propensity score-matched study. Hip Int2022; 32: 610–619.
26.
MahajanSMMahajanASNguyenC, et al. Risk factors for readmissions after total joint replacement: a meta-analysis. JBJS Rev2021; 9: e20.00122.
27.
KanetaHShojiTUekiS, et al. Evaluation of cup placement accuracy in computer assisted total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2025; 145: 191.
28.
ImaiNTakuboRSuzukiH, et al. Accuracy of acetabular cup placement using CT-based navigation in total hip arthroplasty: comparison between obese and non-obese patients. J Orthop Sci2019; 24: 482–487.
29.
KurosakaKOgawaHHirasawaN, et al. Does augmented reality-based portable navigation improve the accuracy of cup placement in THA compared with accelerometer-based portable navigation? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res2023; 481: 1515–1523.
30.
TsukadaSOgawaHHirasawaN, et al. Augmented reality- vs accelerometer-based portable navigation system to improve the accuracy of acetabular cup placement during total hip arthroplasty in the lateral decubitus position. J Arthroplasty2022; 37: 488–494.
31.
MeermansGKonanSDasR, et al. The direct anterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. Bone Joint J2017; 99-B: 732–740.
32.
YanLGeLDongS, et al. Evaluation of comparative efficacy and safety of surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open2023; 6: e2253942.
33.
PincusDJenkinsonRPatersonM, et al. Association between surgical approach and major surgical complications in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. JAMA2020; 323: 1070–1076.
34.
MarcovigiASandoniDCiampaliniL, et al. Dislocation risk after robotic arm-assisted total hip arthroplasty: a comparison of anterior, lateral and posterolateral approaches. Hip Int2023; 33: 426–433.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
