Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association (대한정형외과학회지)

Korean Orthopaedic Association (대한정형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Robotic Surgery in the Orthopedic Field

정형외과 영역에서 로봇수술

  • Lee, Woo-Suk (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jung, Woo-Suk (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • 이우석 (연세대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 정우석 (연세대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실)
  • Received : 2017.10.30
  • Accepted : 2018.07.25
  • Published : 2018.12.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Of the many factors that affect the clinical outcomes of orthopedic surgery, the surgical procedure is the most important. Robotics have been developed to perform the surgical procedures more accurately and consistently. Robotic surgical procedures in the orthopedic field were developed 20 years ago. Some designs of surgical robots have disappeared due to practical problems and complications, and an another design of surgical robots is emerging. To date, the use of robot surgery in arthroplasty is still controversial in terms of the clinical outcomes, practicality, and cost-effectiveness, even though it has been reported to be effective in the alignment and positioning of components in the field of artificial joints. Early robotic surgery was based mainly on active robot surgery according to the scheduled operation without the intervention of the operator. Recently the semi-active system of robotic surgery has been introduced. In a semi-active system, the robot constrains the surgeon to a haptic boundary defined by the computer based on the 3-dimensional imaging preoperative plan, and the operator can change the preoperative plan through real-time feedback during operation.

정형외과 수술의 임상적 결과에 영향을 미치는 요소는 여러 가지가 있지만 수술적 수기가 가장 중요한 요인이며 로봇공학은 술기를 보다 정확하고 일관되게 수행하기 위해 도입되었다. 정형외과 영역에서는 20년 전부터 로봇수술을 사용하였으나 실용성 문제와 합병증의 발생으로 일부 로봇은 도태되었으며 단점을 개선한 로봇이 소개되고 있다. 대부분의 로봇수술은 인공관절수술 분야에서 시행되었고 치환물의 정렬과 위치 선정에서 우수한 것으로 보고되고 있다. 그러나 임상적 결과의 우수성, 실용성, 가성비 등의 측면에서 제한점이 있고 일부 로봇수술에서는 합병증 발생 빈도가 높다는 보고가 있었다. 초기 로봇수술은 수술자의 개입 없이 계획된 수술이 진행되는 능동형 로봇수술이 주를 이루었으나 최근에는 수술과정에서 실시간 피드백을 통해 술자가 술 전 계획을 변경할 수 있고, 햅틱 경계 내에서 제한된 골절제를 함으로써 주요 혈관, 신경, 인대 등의 손상을 최소화할 수 있는 반능동형 로봇수술이 소개되고 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Zheng G, Nolte LP. Computer-assisted orthopedic surgery: current state and future perspective. Front Surg. 2015;2:66.
  2. Urish KL, Conditt M, Roche M, Rubash HE. Robotic total knee arthroplasty: surgical assistant for a customized normal kinematic knee. Orthopedics. 2016;39:e822-7. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20160623-13
  3. Keeney JA. Innovations in total knee arthroplasty: improved technical precision, but unclear clinical benefits. Orthopedics. 2016;39:217-20. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20160628-03
  4. Waddell BS, Carroll K, Jerabek S. Technology in arthroplasty: are we improving value? Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2017;10:378-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-017-9415-6
  5. Hill C, El-Bash R, Johnson L, Coustasse A. Robotic joint replacement surgery: does technology improve outcomes? Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2015;34:128-36.
  6. Goradia VK. Computer-assisted and robotic surgery in orthopedics: where we are in 2014. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2014;22:202-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/JSA.0000000000000047
  7. Jacofsky DJ, Allen M. Robotics in arthroplasty: a comprehensive review. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31:2353-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.05.026
  8. Karthik K, Colegate-Stone T, Dasgupta P, Tavakkolizadeh A, Sinha J. Robotic surgery in trauma and orthopaedics: a systematic review. Bone Joint J. 2015;97:292-9. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00707
  9. Lang JE, Mannava S, Floyd AJ, et al. Robotic systems in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:1296-9.
  10. Ng AT, Tam PC. Current status of robot-assisted surgery. Hong Kong Med J. 2014;20:241-50.
  11. Singh I. Robotics in urological surgery: review of current status and maneuverability, and comparison of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopy. Comput Aided Surg. 2011;16:38-45. https://doi.org/10.3109/10929088.2010.541620
  12. Hepinstall MS. Robotic total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2014;45:443-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2014.06.003
  13. Sugano N. Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery and robotic surgery in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg. 2013;5:1-9.
  14. Netravali NA, Shen F, Park Y, Bargar WL. A perspective on robotic assistance for knee arthroplasty. Adv Orthop. 2013;2013:970703.
  15. Park SE, Lee CT. Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional manual implantation of a primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:1054-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2007.05.036
  16. Cobb J, Henckel J, Gomes P, et al. Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:188-97. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200601000-00022
  17. Lonner JH, Moretti VM. The evolution of image-free robotic assistance in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2016;45:249-54.
  18. Lonner JH. Robotically assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with a handheld image-free sculpting tool. Orthop Clin North Am. 2016;47:29-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2015.08.024
  19. Lonner JH, John TK, Conditt MA. Robotic arm-assisted UKA improves tibial component alignment: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:141-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0977-5
  20. Roche M. Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the MAKO experience. Orthop Clin North Am. 2015;46:125-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2014.09.008
  21. Overley SC, Cho SK, Mehta AI, Arnold PM. Navigation and robotics in spinal surgery: where are we now? Neurosurgery. 2017;80:S86-99. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyw077
  22. van der List JP, Chawla H, Joskowicz L, Pearle AD. Current state of computer navigation and robotics in unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24:3482-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4305-9
  23. Citak M, Suero EM, Citak M, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: is robotic technology more accurate than conventional technique? Knee. 2013;20:268-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2012.11.001
  24. Pearle AD, O'Loughlin PF, Kendoff DO. Robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:230-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2008.09.024
  25. Bell SW, Anthony I, Jones B, MacLean A, Rowe P, Blyth M. Improved accuracy of component positioning with robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: data from a prospective, randomized controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98:627-35. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.15.00664
  26. Song EK, Seon JK, Park SJ, Jung WB, Park HW, Lee GW. Simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty with robotic and conventional techniques: a prospective, randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011;19:1069-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1400-9
  27. Koulalis D, O'Loughlin PF, Plaskos C, Kendoff D, Cross MB, Pearle AD. Sequential versus automated cutting guides in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2011;18:436-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2010.08.007
  28. Bargar WL, Bauer A, Borner M. Primary and revision total hip replacement using the Robodoc system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;354:82-91. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199809000-00011
  29. Honl M, Dierk O, Gauck C, et al. Comparison of robotic-assisted and manual implantation of a primary total hip replacement. A prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:1470-8. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200308000-00007
  30. Schulz AP, Seide K, Queitsch C, 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;3:301-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.161
  31. Elson L, Dounchis J, Illgen R, et al. Precision of acetabular cup placement in robotic integrated total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int. 2015;25:531-6. https://doi.org/10.5301/hipint.5000289
  32. Domb BG, Redmond JM, Louis SS, et al. Accuracy of component positioning in 1980 total hip arthroplasties: a comparative analysis by surgical technique and mode of guidance. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30:2208-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.06.059