Clinical efficacy of orthopilot navigation system versus conventional manual of total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

To compare the clinical efficacy between Orthopilot navigation system and conventional manual surgery in total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating Orthopilot navigation system versus conventional manual in patients undergoing THA. Outcome measurements include anteversion angle, inclination angle, preoperative leg length discrepancy, postoperative leg length discrepancy and femoral offset. Statistical software Stata 12.0 was used for data-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies were finally included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that the conventional manual group have a less anteversion angle than that in Orthopilot navigation system group (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 4.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.53, 5.82, P = .000). And pooled analysis showed that the inclination angle in Orthopilot navigation group was less than that in conventional manual group (WMD = -4.19, 95% CI = -8.00, -0.37, P = .031). There was no significant difference between the preoperative leg length discrepancy and postoperative leg length discrepancy (P > .05). Orthopilot navigation system compared with conventional manual procedure was associated with decreased of femoral offset by 2.76 (WMD = -2.76, 95%CI = -3.90, -1.62, P = .000).

CONCLUSION

Both Orthopilot navigation system and conventional THA result in significant improvements in patient function with similar overall complication rates and have their own edges in cup position.