Robotic Systems and Navigation Techniques in Orthopedics: A Historical Review
Source abstract
Abstract
Since the da Vinci surgical system was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2000, the development and deployment of various robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (MIS) systems have been largely expedited and boomed. With the rapid advancement of robotic techniques in recent decades, robot-assisted systems have been widely used in various surgeries including orthopedics. These robot-related techniques are transforming the conventional ways to conduct surgical procedures. Robot-assisted orthopedic surgeries have become more and more popular due to their potential benefits of increased accuracy and precision in surgical outcomes, enhanced reproducibility, reduced technical variability, decreased pain, and faster recovery time. In this paper, robotic systems and navigation techniques in typical orthopedic surgeries are reviewed, especially for arthroplasty. From the perspective of robotics and engineering, the systems and techniques are divided into two main categories, i.e., robotic systems (RSs), and computer-aided navigation systems (CANSs). The former is further divided into autonomous RS, hands-on RS, and teleoperated RS. For the latter, three key elements in CANS are introduced, including 3D modeling, registration, and navigation. Lastly, the potential advantages and disadvantages of the RS and CANS are summarized and discussed. Future perspectives on robotics in orthopedics, as well as the challenges, are presented.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Soft Robotics and Applications · Anatomy and Medical Technology · Surgical Simulation and Training
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada
Western Hand & Upper Limb Facility, Sturgeon Hospital, St. Albert, AB T8N 6C4, Canada
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R7, Canada
Walker Department of Mechanical Engineering and the Texas Robotics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA
Funding
Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) · Government of Alberta · Government of Alberta’s grant to Centre for Autonomous Systems in Strengthening Future Communities · Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada · Edmonton Civic Employee Charitable Assistance Fund
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. Devol, G.C. (1961). Programmed Article Transfer. (2988237A), U.S. Patent.
2. Robotics in arthroplasty: A comprehensive review10.1016/j.arth.2016.05.026 ↗
3. A review of robotics in surgery10.1243/0954411001535309 ↗
4. Lonner, J.H. (2019). Robotics in Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: Current Concepts, Techniques and Emerging Uses, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-16593-2 ↗
5. Emerging robotic platforms for minimally invasive surgery10.1109/RBME.2012.2236311 ↗
6. Endoscopic robotic decompression of the ulnar nerve at the elbow10.1016/j.eats.2014.02.008 ↗
7. D’Ettorre, C., Mariani, A., Stilli, A., Valdastri, P., Deguet, A., Kazanzides, P., Taylor, R.H., Fischer, G.S., DiMaio, S.P., and Menciassi, A. (2021). Accelerating surgical robotics research: Reviewing 10 years of research with the dVRK. arXiv.10.1109/MRA.2021.3101646 ↗
8. Beasley, R.A. (2012). Medical robots: Current systems and research directions. J. Robot., 2012.10.1155/2012/401613 ↗
9. Ginoya, T., Maddahi, Y., and Zareinia, K. (2021). A historical review of medical robotic platforms. J. Robot., 2021.10.1155/2021/6640031 ↗
10. Robotics in vivo: A perspective on human–robot interaction in surgical robotics10.1146/annurev-control-091219-013437 ↗
11. History of robotic surgery: From AESOP® and ZEUS® to da Vinci®10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2011.04.007 ↗
12. Raven-II: An open platform for surgical robotics research10.1109/TBME.2012.2228858 ↗
13. Kilby, W., Naylor, M., Dooley, J.R., Maurer, C.R., and Sayeh, S. (2020). Handbook of Robotic and Image-Guided Surgery, Elsevier.
14. A steady-hand robotic system for microsurgical augmentation10.1177/02783649922067807 ↗
15. Mitchell, B., Koo, J., Iordachita, I., Kazanzides, P., Kapoor, A., Handa, J., Hager, G., and Taylor, R. (2007, January 10–14). Development and application of a new steady-hand manipulator for retinal surgery. Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Roma, Italy.10.1109/ROBOT.2007.363056 ↗
16. A review of robotic and OCT-aided systems for vitreoretinal surgery10.1007/s12325-021-01692-z ↗
17. Computer assisted orthopaedic surgery: Past, present and future10.1016/j.medengphy.2019.08.005 ↗
18. Saragaglia, D. (2020). Handbook of Robotic and Image-Guided Surgery, Elsevier.
19. Current topics in robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty: A review10.1177/1120700019893636 ↗
20. Computer and robotic–assisted total knee arthroplasty: A review of outcomes10.1186/s40634-020-00278-y ↗
21. St Mart, J.P., Goh, E.L., and Shah, Z. (2020). Robotics in total hip arthroplasty: A review of the evolution, application and evidence base. EFORT Open Rev., 5.10.1302/2058-5241.5.200037 ↗
22. Eng, K., Eyre-Brook, A., and Shields, D.W. (2022). A Systematic Review of the Utility of Intraoperative Navigation During Total Shoulder Arthroplasty. Cureus, 14.10.7759/cureus.33087 ↗
23. Haptics in robot-assisted surgery: Challenges and benefits10.1109/RBME.2016.2538080 ↗
24. A novel handheld robotic-assisted system for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Surgical technique and early survivorship10.1007/s11701-018-00907-w ↗
25. Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery and robotic surgery in total hip arthroplasty10.4055/cios.2013.5.1.1 ↗
26. Robotic systems in orthopaedic surgery10.1302/0301-620X.93B10.27418 ↗
27. Available robotic platforms in partial and total knee arthroplasty10.1053/j.oto.2015.03.002 ↗
28. Robotic control in knee joint replacement surgery10.1243/09544119JEIM250 ↗
29. Lonner, J.H. (2019). Robotics in Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: Current Concepts, Techniques and Emerging Uses, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-16593-2 ↗
30. Catani, F., and Zaffagnini, S. (2013). Knee Surgery Using Computer Assisted Surgery and Robotics, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-31430-8 ↗
31. The primary stability between manual and robot assisted implantation of hip prostheses: A biomechanical study on synthetic femurs10.1055/s-2004-822794 ↗
32. The dimensional accuracy of preparation of femoral cavity in cementless total hip arthroplasty10.1631/jzus.2004.1270 ↗
33. Clinical outcome following robotic assisted versus conventional total hip arthroplasty: A controlled and prospective study of seventy-one patients10.1055/s-2005-836776 ↗
34. The CyberKnife® robotic radiosurgery system in 201010.1177/153303461000900502 ↗
35. Computer-assisted preoperative planning, interactive surgery, and frameless stereotaxy
36. The Cyberknife: A frameless robotic system for radiosurgery10.1159/000099863 ↗
37. Liu, P., Lu, F.F., Liu, G.J., Mu, X.H., Sun, Y.Q., Zhang, Q.D., Wang, W.G., and Guo, W.S. (2021). Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review. Arthroplasty, 3.10.1186/s42836-021-00071-x ↗
38. Robotic surgery: From autonomous systems to intelligent tools10.1017/S0263574709990427 ↗
39. Active compliance in robotic surgery—The use of force control as a dynamic constraint10.1243/0954411971534403 ↗
40. Robots in orthopaedic surgery: Past, present, and future10.1097/BLO.0b013e318146874f ↗
41. Robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty10.1016/j.arth.2008.09.024 ↗
42. Minimally invasive Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Functional results at 1 year and the effect of surgical inexperience10.1016/j.knee.2003.12.006 ↗
43. High degree of accuracy of a novel image-free handheld robot for unicondylar knee arthroplasty in a cadaveric study10.1007/s11999-014-3764-x ↗
44. Wallace, D., Gregori, A., Picard, F., Bellemans, J., Lonner, J., Marquez, R., Smith, J., Simone, A., and Jaramaz, B. (2014). The learning curve of a novel handheld robotic system for unicondylar knee arthroplasty. Orthop. Proc., 96-B.
45. Simons, M., and Riches, P. (2014). The learning curve of robotically-assisted unicondylar knee arthroplasty. Bone Jt. J., 96-B.
46. Maillet, P., Nahum, B., Blondel, L., Poignet, P., and Dombre, E. (2005, January 18–22). BRIGIT, a robotized tool guide for orthopedic surgery. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Barcelona, Spain.
47. Kuang, S., Tang, Y., Lin, A., Yu, S., and Sun, L. (2018). Intelligent Orthopaedics: Artificial Intelligence and Smart Image-Guided Technology for Orthopaedics, Springer.
48. MBARS: Mini bone-attached robotic system for joint arthroplasty10.1002/rcs.20 ↗
49. HyBAR: Hybrid bone-attached robot for joint arthroplasty10.1002/rcs.254 ↗
50. Praxiteles: A miniature bone-mounted robot for minimal access total knee arthroplasty10.1002/rcs.59 ↗
51. Lonner, J.H. (2019). Robotics in Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: Current Concepts, Techniques and Emerging Uses, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-16593-2 ↗
52. Sequential versus automated cutting guides in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty10.1016/j.knee.2010.08.007 ↗
53. Stiehl, J.B., Konermann, W.H., Haaker, R.G., and DiGioia, A.M. (2007). Navigation and MIS in Orthopedic Surgery, Springer.10.1007/978-3-540-36691-1 ↗
54. Netravali, N.A., Shen, F., Park, Y., and Bargar, W.L. (2013). A perspective on robotic assistance for knee arthroplasty. Adv. Orthop., 2013.10.1155/2013/970703 ↗
55. Accuracy of thoracolumbar transpedicular and vertebral body percutaneous screw placement: Coupling the Rosa® Spine robot with intraoperative flat-panel CT guidance—A cadaver study10.1007/s11701-015-0536-x ↗
56. Evaluation of the ROSA™ Spine robot for minimally invasive surgical procedures10.1080/17434440.2016.1236680 ↗
57. New spinal robotic technologies10.1007/s11684-019-0716-6 ↗
58. Image-free robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty improves implant alignment accuracy: A cadaveric study10.1016/j.arth.2021.12.035 ↗
59. Patient-Specific TKA with the VELYS™ Robotic-Assisted Solution
60. Robotic spine surgery: Past, present, and future10.1097/BRS.0000000000004357 ↗
61. Robotic navigation during spine surgery: An update of literature10.1080/17434440.2023.2243215 ↗
62. New era of robotic surgical systems10.1111/ases.12660 ↗
63. Ensuring navigation integrity using robotics in spine surgery10.1007/s11701-019-00963-w ↗
64. Huang, M., Tetreault, T.A., Vaishnav, A., York, P.J., and Staub, B.N. (2021). The current state of navigation in robotic spine surgery. Ann. Transl. Med., 9.10.21037/atm-2020-ioi-07 ↗
65. Intramedullary nail fixation assisted by orthopaedic robot navigation for intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients10.1111/os.12447 ↗
66. Rosen, J., Hannaford, B., and Satava, R.M. (2010). Surgical Robotics: Systems Applications and Visions, Springer.10.1007/978-1-4419-1126-1 ↗
67. Robot-assisted surgery of the shoulder girdle and brachial plexus10.1055/s-0034-1368167 ↗
68. The da Vinci robotic surgical assisted anterior lumbar interbody fusion: Technical development and case report10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826b3d72 ↗
69. Technique and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted anterior lumbar interbody fusion10.1007/s11701-012-0365-0 ↗
70. Method for registration of 3-D shapes
71. Validation of the registration accuracy of navigation-assisted arthroscopic debridement for elbow osteoarthritis10.1016/j.jse.2019.06.009 ↗
72. Qin, Y., Geng, P., You, Y., Ma, M., Wang, H., and Han, J. (2023). Collaborative Preoperative Planning for Operation-Navigation Dual-Robot Orthopedic Surgery System. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng.10.1109/TASE.2023.3272376 ↗
73. Digioia, A.M., Simon, D., Jaramaz, B., Blackwell, M., Morgan, F., O’Toole, R.V., Colgan, B., and Kischell, E. (December, January 30). HipNav: Pre-operative planning and intra-operative navigational guidance for acetabular implant placement in total hip replacement surgery. Proceedings of the Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery Symposium, Bern, Switzerland.
74. Pan, Y., Jiang, B., Li, Y., Yu, Y., and Chen, Y. (2022). Alignment analysis of Brainlab knee 3 navigation-guided total knee arthroplasty using the adjusted mechanical method. Front. Surg., 9.10.3389/fsurg.2022.1040025 ↗
75. Image-based navigation improves the positioning of the humeral component in total elbow arthroplasty10.1016/j.jse.2009.10.010 ↗
76. Quantitative analysis of technological innovation in knee arthroplasty: Using patent and publication metrics to identify developments and trends10.1016/j.arth.2015.12.031 ↗
77. Robotic technology in orthopaedic surgery10.2106/JBJS.17.01397 ↗
78. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis10.1056/NEJMct0806027 ↗
79. Athwal, G.S. (2017). PART IV, Elbow and Forearm, Elsevier. Chapter 26, Elbow Arthroscopy.
80. Incorporating new technologies to overcome the limitations of endoscopic spine surgery: Navigation, robotics, and visualization10.1016/j.wneu.2020.06.188 ↗
81. Surgical drilling of curved holes in bone—A patent review10.1080/17434440.2019.1596794 ↗
82. A curved-drilling approach in core decompression of the femoral head osteonecrosis using a continuum manipulator10.1109/LRA.2017.2668469 ↗
83. On the use of a continuum manipulator and a bendable medical screw for minimally invasive interventions in orthopedic surgery10.1109/TMRB.2019.2895780 ↗
84. A surgical robotic system for treatment of pelvic osteolysis using an FBG-equipped continuum manipulator and flexible instruments10.1109/TMECH.2020.3020504 ↗
85. A dexterous robotic system for autonomous debridement of osteolytic bone lesions in confined spaces: Human cadaver studies10.1109/TRO.2021.3091283 ↗
86. Design and experimental validation of a miniaturized robotic tendon-driven articulated surgical drill for enhancing distal dexterity in minimally invasive spine fusion10.1109/TMECH.2021.3077706 ↗
87. An active steering hand-held robotic system for minimally invasive orthopaedic surgery using a continuum manipulator10.1109/LRA.2021.3059634 ↗
88. A Handheld Steerable Surgical Drill with a Novel Miniaturized Articulated Joint Module for Dexterous Confined-Space Bone Work10.1109/TBME.2022.3157818 ↗
89. Sharma, S., Sun, Y., Go, S., Amadio, J.P., Khadem, M., Eskandari, A.H., and Alambeigi, F. (2023, January 19–21). Towards Biomechanics-Aware Design of a Steerable Drilling Robot for Spinal Fixation Procedures with Flexible Pedicle Screws. Proceedings of the 2023 International Symposium on Medical Robotics (ISMR), Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1109/ISMR57123.2023.10130273 ↗
90. Sharma, S., Mohanraj, T.G., Amadio, J.P., Khadem, M., and Alambeigi, F. (2023). A Concentric Tube Steerable Drilling Robot for Minimally Invasive Spinal Fixation of Osteoporotic Vertebrae. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 1–11.10.1109/TBME.2023.3272306 ↗
91. A review of computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery systems
92. A Prospective Assessment of Knee Arthroscopy Skills Between Medical Students and Residents—Simulator Exercises for Partial Meniscectomy and Analysis of Learning Curves10.1177/15533506211037792 ↗
93. Artificial intelligence in orthopedics: A concise review
94. El-Galaly, A., Grazal, C., Kappel, A., Nielsen, P.T., Jensen, S.L., and Forsberg, J.A. (2020). Can machine-learning algorithms predict early revision TKA in the Danish knee arthroplasty registry?. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res., 478.10.1097/CORR.0000000000001343 ↗
95. Kurmis, A.P., and Ianunzio, J.R. (2022). Artificial intelligence in orthopedic surgery: Evolution, current state and future directions. Arthroplasty, 4.10.1186/s42836-022-00112-z ↗
96. The evolution of virtual reality in shoulder and elbow surgery10.1016/j.jseint.2020.02.005 ↗
97. Van der Putten, K., Anderson, M.B., and van Geenen, R.C. (2022). Looking through the Lens: The Reality of Telesurgical Support with Interactive Technology Using Microsoft’s HoloLens 2. Case Rep. Orthop., 2022.10.1155/2022/5766340 ↗
98. Hussain, M., Khan, S.M., Al-Khaled, K., Ayadi, M., Abbas, N., and Chammam, W. (2022). Performance analysis of biodegradable materials for orthopedic applications. Mater. Today Commun., 31.10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.103167 ↗
99. Hussain, M., Ullah, S., Raza, M.R., Abbas, N., and Ali, A. (2022). Recent Developments in Zn-Based Biodegradable Materials for Biomedical Applications. J. Funct. Biomater., 14.10.3390/jfb14010001 ↗
100. Robotic surgery in trauma and orthopaedics: A systematic review10.1302/0301-620X.97B3.35107 ↗