Literature DB >> 18676940

Does computer-assisted surgery improve accuracy and decrease the learning curve in hip resurfacing? A radiographic analysis.

Thorsten M Seyler1, Lawrence P Lai, Denise I Sprinkle, William G Ward, Riyaz H Jinnah.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hip resurfacing is a technically demanding procedure in which accurate positioning of the femoral component is critical to the avoidance of early implant failures. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of computer-assisted placement of the femoral component and to evaluate the impact of computer-assisted surgery on the learning curve associated with this procedure.
METHODS: The accuracy of positioning the femoral component was analyzed radiographically in hips undergoing resurfacing procedures performed by surgeons assigned to four different study groups: Group 1, in which the operations were performed with use of computer-assisted surgery by a fellowship-trained surgeon who was experienced in performing resurfacing arthroplasty (surgical experience, more than 250 hip resurfacings); Group 2, in which the operations were performed with use of computer-assisted surgery by senior residents who were inexperienced in performing resurfacing arthroplasty and who were closely supervised by faculty; Group 3, in which the operations were performed with use of conventional instruments by fellowship-trained faculty members; and Group 4, in which the operations were performed with use of computer-assisted surgery by a lesser experienced fellowship-trained faculty member (surgical experience, more than forty but less than seventy-five hip resurfacings) from Group 3.
RESULTS: The range of error in varus or valgus angulation that was observed for navigated procedures was 6 degrees in Group 1, 7 degrees in Group 2, and 5 degrees in Group 4. Compared with the preoperative neck-shaft angle value, the mean postoperative stem-shaft angle value increased by a mean of 4.7 degrees in Group 1, 7.2 degrees in Group 2, 6.5 degrees in Group 3, and 11.6 degrees in Group 4. When compared with the use of standard instrumentation, the use of computer-assisted surgery reduced the number of outliers and facilitated valgus insertion.
CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, computer-assisted surgery resulted in improved accuracy and precision in positioning the femoral component. In addition, computer-assisted surgery led to a reduction in the length of the learning curve for beginners in hip resurfacing and improved the surgeon's ability to perform this procedure safely.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18676940     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00697

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  17 in total

1.  [Durom™ hip resurfacing. Short- to midterm clinical and radiological outcome].

Authors:  J Goronzy; M Stiehler; S Kirschner; K-P Günther
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  [Imageless computer navigation of hip resurfacing arthroplasty].

Authors:  Christoph Schnurr; Jochen Nessler; Jürgen Koebke; Joern William Michael; Peer Eysel; Dietmar Pierre König
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.154

3.  Intraoperative radiographs for placing acetabular components in hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors:  Thomas P Gross; Fei Liu; Lee Webb
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  A simple technique for alignment in total hip resurfacing arthroplasty: technical note and preliminary report.

Authors:  Manuel Villanueva-Martínez; Antonio Ríos-Luna; Angel Villamor-Pérez
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2009-06-09

5.  The learning curve for adopting hip resurfacing among hip specialists.

Authors:  Ryan M Nunley; Jinjun Zhu; Peter J Brooks; C Anderson Engh; Stephen J Raterman; John S Rogerson; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Radiological validation of a fluoroscopic guided technique for femoral implant positioning during hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Philippe Chiron; Régis Pailhé; Nicolas Reina; David Ancelin; Akash Sharma; Laurent Maubisson; Jean-Michel Laffosse
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  The First SICOT Oral Presentation Award 2011: imageless computer-assisted femoral component positioning in hip resurfacing: a prospective randomised trial.

Authors:  Maik Stiehler; Jens Goronzy; Albrecht Hartmann; Frank Krummenauer; Klaus-Peter Günther
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Hip resurfacing data from national joint registries: what do they tell us? What do they not tell us?

Authors:  Kristoff Corten; Steven J MacDonald
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Are component positioning and prosthesis size associated with hip resurfacing failure?

Authors:  David R Marker; Michael G Zywiel; Aaron J Johnson; Thorsten M Seyler; Michael A Mont
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-10-02       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Accuracy of computer-assisted navigation for femoral head resurfacing decreases in hips with abnormal anatomy.

Authors:  Rocco P Pitto; Sharif Malak; Iain A Anderson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.