臨床整形外科57巻8号

2022年08月発行

特集 整形外科ロボット支援手術 股関節編

股関節におけるナビゲーションとロボット支援手術

著者： 池裕之¹ 稲葉裕¹

所属機関： ¹横浜市立大学整形外科

ページ範囲：P.941 - P.946

現代の外科治療において，安全で精度の高い手術治療が求められており，ナビゲーションシステムやロボットを使用するコンピュータ支援手術が注目されている．人工股関節全置換術にナビゲーションシステムやロボットを使用することでインプラント設置精度が向上するが，導入コストなどの問題により使用率はいまだ低い．人工股関節全置換術のさらなる成績向上が期待される中で，コンピュータ支援手術の普及・発展が望まれる．

参考文献

1) 稲葉　裕，池　裕之，齋藤知行．最新のナビゲーションシステムとロボット手術．関節外科2017；36(11)：1190-7．

2) 池　裕之，大庭真俊，稲葉　裕．ナビゲーション支援による寛骨臼回転骨切り術．臨整科2020；55(6)：705-12．

3) 稲葉　裕，池　裕之，齋藤知行．ナビゲーション支援人工股関節全置換術．運動器リハ2017；28(4)：367-73．

4) Biedermann R, Tonin A, Krismer M, et al. Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty:the effect of orientation of the acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87(6):762-9.

5) 稲葉　裕，小林直実，鈴木　宙・他．人工股関節全置換術における骨盤傾斜を考慮したインプラント設置の術前計画と術後検証．日関節病会誌2013；32(4)：433-40．

6) Sugano N, Takao M, Sakai T, et al. Does CT-based navigation improve the long-term survival in ceramic-on-ceramic THA? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012;470(11):3054-9.

7) Bohl DD, Nolte MT, Ong K, et al. Computer-assisted navigation is associated with reductions in the rates of dislocation and acetabular component revision following primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2019;101(3):250-6.

8) Agarwal S, Eckhard L, Walter WL, et al. The use of computer navigation in total hip arthroplasty is associated with a reduced rate of revision for dislocation:a study of 6,912 navigated THA procedures from the Australian orthopaedic association national joint replacement registry. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2021;103(20):1900-5.

9) Parratte S, Ollivier M, Lunebourg A, et al. No benefit after THA performed with computer-assisted cup placement:10-year results of a randomized controlled study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016;474(10):2085-93.

10) Wasterlain AS, Buza JA 3rd, Thakkar SC, et al. Navigation and robotics in total hip arthroplasty. JBJS Rev 2017;5(3):e2. doi:10.2106./JBJS.RVW.16.00046.

11) Jacofsky DJ, Allen M. Robotics in arthroplasty:a comprehensive review. J Arthroplasty 2016;31(10):2353-63.

(Robodoc) total knee arthroplasty. SICOT J 2017;3:63.

13) Dungy DS, Netravali NA. Active robotics for total hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2016;45(4):256-9.

14) Nishihara S, Sugano N, Nishii T, et al. Comparison between hand rasping and robotic milling for stem implantation in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2006;21(7):957-66.

15) Nakamura N, Sugano N, Nishii T, et al. A comparison between robotic-assisted and manual implantation of cementless total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468(4):1072-81.

16) Nakamura N, Sugano N, Sakai T, et al. Does robotic milling for stem implantation in cementless THA result in improved outcomes scores or survivorship compared with hand rasping? Results of a randomized trial at 10 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018;476(11):2169-73.

17) 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(8):1470-8.

18) Domb BG, El Bitar YF, Sadik AY, et al. 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.

19) Kanawade V, Dorr LD, Banks SA, et al. Precision of robotic guided instrumentation for acetabular component positioning. J Arthroplasty 2015;30(3):392-7.

20) Hayashi S, Hashimoto S, Kuroda Y, et al. Accuracy of cup position following robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty may be associated with surgical approach and pelvic tilt. Sci Rep 2021;11(1):7578.

21) Sweet MC, Borrelli GJ, Manawar SS, et al. Comparison of outcomes after robotic-assisted or conventional total hip arthroplasty at a minimum 2-year follow-up:a systematic review. JBJS Rev 2021;9(6):e20.00144. doi:10.2106/JBJS.RVW.20.00144.