Journal of Novel Physiotherapies
Open Access

Orthopaedic surgery, for much of its history, has relied on open surgical techniques involving large incisions to access bones, joints, and soft tissues. These conventional methods, while effective, often resulted in significant tissue trauma, prolonged recovery periods, considerable postoperative pain, and higher risks of complications such as infections and excessive blood loss. Patients typically faced extended hospital stays and long-term rehabilitation to regain mobility and function. This approach, while necessary for complex conditions, presented challenges, especially for elderly patients or those with multiple comorbidities, where recovery could be particularly arduous [1].

In response to these challenges, the field of orthopaedics has undergone a remarkable transformation with the introduction and advancement of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques. These procedures involve smaller incisions, refined instrumentation, and cutting-edge imaging technologies, enabling surgeons to achieve the same, or even better, outcomes as traditional methods while minimizing the damage to surrounding tissues. This shift has been driven by several factors, including technological innovations in medical devices, enhanced imaging systems such as real-time 3D navigation, and the growing use of robotics in surgery [2].

One of the most significant advantages of minimally invasive techniques is the reduction in trauma to muscles, ligaments, and other tissues, resulting in faster recovery times and shorter hospital stays. Patients experience less postoperative discomfort, allowing them to return to daily activities and physical therapy sooner. In many cases, MIS procedures can also be performed on an outpatient basis, further reducing healthcare costs and the burden on hospital resources.

The rising demand for minimally invasive options is also linked to the aging population, as more individuals seek to maintain an active lifestyle later in life. As such, the development of these techniques has been a response not only to technological progress but also to a changing patient demographic that desires quicker recovery, reduced downtime, and improved quality of life after surgery.

This article delves into the major advancements in minimally invasive orthopaedic surgery, including arthroscopy, robotic-assisted surgery, minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS), and percutaneous fixation techniques. It will also explore the benefits these techniques offer over traditional approaches and how they are shaping the future of orthopaedic care, providing patients with more efficient and less disruptive surgical solutions.

Description

Evolution of minimally invasive techniques

Traditional orthopaedic surgery involves open procedures that expose the operative site through large incisions, often leading to longer recovery times and a higher risk of complications. The advent of minimally invasive techniques has revolutionized the field by employing smaller incisions and advanced imaging technologies to achieve precise results with minimal disruption to surrounding tissues [3]. Techniques such as arthroscopy and endoscopic-assisted procedures have paved the way for these advancements.

Key advancements in minimally invasive orthopaedic surgery

Arthroscopy: Arthroscopy has become a cornerstone of minimally invasive orthopaedics. It involves the use of a small camera (arthroscope) inserted through a tiny incision, allowing the surgeon to visualize the joint and perform the surgery using miniature instruments. This approach is widely used for joint repair and reconstruction, especially in the knee, shoulder, and hip [4].

Robotic-assisted surgery: Robotic systems, such as MAKO and ROSA, are being increasingly integrated into orthopaedic surgery, particularly in joint replacement procedures. These systems enhance precision by providing real-time 3D imaging and guided instrument navigation, ensuring more accurate bone cuts and implant positioning.

Minimally invasive spine surgery: It involves techniques such as microdiscectomy and spinal fusion, which reduce the size of incisions while maintaining the effectiveness of traditional spine surgery [5]. Using tubular retractors and endoscopes, surgeons can address herniated discs, spinal stenosis, and deformities with less damage to muscles and tissues.

Percutaneous fixation techniques: For fractures, percutaneous techniques allow surgeons to stabilize bones through small incisions, minimizing tissue trauma. Devices such as cannulated screws and intramedullary nails are inserted with imaging guidance, enabling faster recovery and reduced complications [6].

Benefits of minimally invasive orthopaedic surgery:

Reduced pain and scarring: Smaller incisions and less disruption to muscles and tissues result in less postoperative pain and minimal scarring.

Faster recovery: Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures typically experience quicker rehabilitation and shorter hospital stays [7].

Lower risk of infection: Smaller incisions reduce the risk of infection and other complications associated with open surgeries.

Improved precision and outcomes: The use of advanced imaging and robotic systems improves surgical precision, leading to better alignment, implant positioning, and long-term outcomes [8].

Conclusion

The advancements in minimally invasive orthopaedic techniques have marked a significant shift in how orthopaedic conditions are treated. By reducing surgical trauma and enhancing precision, these techniques offer numerous benefits for patients, including faster recovery, less pain, and improved overall outcomes. As technology continues to evolve, the future of orthopaedic surgery will likely see even greater innovations, further minimizing invasiveness and improving patient care.

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None

References

1. Stewart S, Dalbeth N, Vandal AC, Rome K (2016) The first metatarsophalangeal joint in gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17: 69-96.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Polachek A, Li S, Chandran V, Gladman D (2017) Clinical enthesitis in a prospective longitudinal psoriatic arthritis cohort: incidence, prevalence, characteristics and outcome: Enthesitis in psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 69: 1685-1691.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Koca TT, Göğebakan H, Koçyiğit BF, Nacitarhan V, Yildir CZ (2019) Foot functions in ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Rheumatol 38: 1083-1088.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Koumakis E, Gossec L, Elhai M, Burki V, Durnez A, et al. (2012) Heel pain in spondyloarthritis: results of a cross-sectional study of 275 patients. Clin Exp Rheumatol 30: 487-491.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

5. Ozaras N, Havan N, Poyraz E, Rezvanı A, Aydın T (2016) Functional limitations due to foot involvement in spondyloarthritis. J Phys Ther Sci 28: 2005-2008.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Hyslop E, McInnes IB, Woodburn J, Turner DE (2010) Foot problems in psoriatic arthritis: high burden and low care provision. Ann Rheum Dis 69: 928-963.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Hudish LI, Reusch JE, Sussel L (2019) Β cell dysfunction during progression of metabolic syndrome to type 2 diabetes. J Clin Investig 129: 4001-4008.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Jung CH, Son JW, Kang S, Kim WJ, Kim H, et al. (2021) Diabetes fact sheets in korea, 2020: An appraisal of current status. Diabetes Metab J 45: 1-10.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref