Why is C.A.R.S. Better?

Better Than Other Traditional Techniques

Traditional surgical techniques are designed to accomplish the same goal... proper alignment and positioning of the implant to insure a successful outcome. The reason that surgeons adopt new techniques is that they all agree that alignment and positioning have been clinically linked to a successful, long-term outcome for their patients. The predominant factor associated with failures and the resulting revision surgery has been linked to instability and mal-alignment of the implant when the surgery was initially done.

MIS or Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques

M.I.S has the aesthetic benefits of a smaller incision and less invasive soft tissue resection, but it does nothing to address the key concerns of alignment and stability. It minimizes the surgeons' ability to visualize the operative site, and in some cases can contribute to mal-alignment of the prosthesis. It is a controversial technique with supporters and detractors alike debating its true long-term value to their patients.

C.A.S. or Computer Assisted Surgical Techniques

C.A.S. was designed to map out each patient's unique anatomy to allow the surgeon to position the resurfacing instruments in an optimal position. The basic drawback to this technique is that the surgeon must position the devices himself, and then affix them to the patient with pins that hold them in place. This leads to greater human errors, which in most cases are irreversible.