In this study we compare survivorship and patient reported outcome measures in robotically assisted versus conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA).

This paper investigates the hypothesis that implant survival and PROMS following THAs performed with robotic assistance were not different to outcomes following conventional THAs.

Data included all patients undergoing THA for osteoarthritis between 19 April 2016 and 31 December 2020. Analysis of PROMS outcomes was restricted to those who had completed PROMS data preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively.

There were 157,647 procedures, including 3567 robotically assisted procedures, available for comparison of revision rates. 4557 procedures, including 130 robotically assisted procedures, had PROMS data available. The revision rate of primary THA performed with robotic assistance was not statistically different from THA performed by conventional methods (4 year cumulative percent revision 3.1% v 2.7%; HR = 1.05, p=0.67). The Oxford Hip Score, VAS for pain and the EQ-VAS score for overall health showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. The EQ-5D Utility Score showed an improved score (median score 1 v 0.88; OR = 1.58, p=0.007) for the robotically assisted group compared to the conventional group.

Robotic assisted THA was not associated with significant improvement in early revision or joint-specific PROMs. The findings may have been biased, in either direction, by unmeasured patient, surgeon, hospital and prosthesis factors. The findings (including the difference in health-related quality of life) may have also been influenced by lack of blinding. Future research should include methods to minimise these biases.

Bleeding related wound complications including deep infection, superficial infection and haematoma cause significant morbidity in lower limb joint arthroplasty surgery. It has been observed anecdotally that patients requiring therapeutic anti-coagulation within the peri-operative period have higher rates of bleeding related complications and those requiring intravenous heparin particularly appear to do poorly.

The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between post-operative bleeding and wound complications in the patient requiring therapeutic warfarin, plus or minus heparin, in total hip arthroplasty surgery.

This is a retrospective cohort study reviewing 1047 primary total hip replacements performed in a single centre over a five year period and comparing outcomes of the patients on warfarin (89) with a double-matched control group of patients not on warfarin (179). Outcomes included rates of deep infection, excessive wound ooze or haematoma, superficial infection, return to OT for washout and need for revision operation. The study group was then sub analysed comparing those on IV heparin plus oral warfarin, to those on warfarin alone.

The warfarin group had significantly higher risk of deep joint infection (9% vs 2.2% p= 0.023), haematoma/wound ooze (28% vs 4% p < 0.001) and superficial infection (13.5% vs 2.2% p < 0.001) compared to the control group. In the sub analysis of the study group, those on IV heparin had significantly higher risk of haematoma/wound ooze (44% vs 28% p= 0.023) than those on warfarin alone.

The requirement of therapeutic anti-coagulation in the peri-operative period is a tenuous balance between the complications of thrombo-embolic disease and bleeding-related morbidity. In the past, perhaps the full burden of bleeding related complications has not been appreciated, but now improved understanding will enable the both the surgeon and the patient to make more informed decisions regarding therapeutic anticoagulation in elective arthroplasty surgery.