Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background/Objectives: Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (raTHA) improves the accuracy and reproducibility of acetabular component positioning compared with conventional THA (cTHA), but whether this translates into superior patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction remains debated. Methods: A retrospective comparative cohort study was performed, including all patients who underwent primary raTHA with the Mako system at our institution (September 2024–May 2025) and an equal-sized control group recruited consecutively from an alphabetically ordered list of 172 eligible cTHAs, starting from a randomly selected letter (August 2022–January 2025), with a minimum follow-up of one year. Treatment allocation was determined by insurance coverage. The postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was the primary outcome; the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) were secondary outcomes, and an overall satisfaction rating and willingness to undergo the surgery again were also recorded. Results: Ninety-three raTHA and 93 cTHA patients were analyzed. Follow-up was longer in the cTHA group (35.6 vs. 15.5 months; p < 0.001). Postoperative WOMAC (10.5 vs. 14.4; mean difference −3.8 points, 95% CI −7.4 to −0.2) and mHHS (86.9 vs. 84.7; mean difference 2.2 points, 95% CI −0.9 to 5.4) differed in rank-based comparisons, favoring raTHA (Mann–Whitney U test, p = 0.020 and p = 0.030, respectively). Point estimates were below the selected clinical-relevance thresholds, but the confidence intervals did not exclude clinically relevant differences; improvement from baseline did not differ between groups. There were no significant differences in VAS, FJS-12, overall satisfaction (9.32 vs. 9.31) or willingness to undergo surgery again (96.8% vs. 97.8%). Conclusions: Given insurance-based allocation, unequal follow-up and unadjusted analyses, robotic-assisted THA was associated with small differences in postoperative WOMAC and mHHS, whose point estimates were below the selected thresholds, although clinically relevant differences cannot be excluded; there were no differences in improvement, pain, joint awareness or satisfaction, which was very high in both groups. These findings do not establish a causal effect of robotic assistance; prospective randomized studies are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
González‐Martín et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: