BACKGROUND: Obesity is a risk factor for acetabular component malposition when total hip arthroplasty is performed with manual techniques. The utility of imageless navigation in obese patients remains unknown. This study compared the accuracy and precision of imageless navigation for component orientation between obese and nonobese patients. METHODS: A total of 459 total hip arthroplasties performed for osteoarthritis using imageless navigation were reviewed from a single surgeon's institutional review board-approved database. Einzel-Bild-Roentgen Analyse determined component orientation on 6-week postoperative anteroposterior radiographs. Mean orientation error (accuracy) and precision were compared between obese (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) and nonobese patients. Regression analysis evaluated the influence of obesity on component position. RESULTS: The difference in mean inclination and anteversion between obese and nonobese groups was 1.1° (43.0° ± 3.5°; range, 35.8°-57.8° vs 41.9° ± 4.4°; range, 33.0°-57.1° and 24.9° ± 6.3°; range, 14.2°-44.3° vs 23.8° ± 6.6°; range, 7.0°-38.6°, respectively). Inclination precision was better for nonobese patients. No difference in inclination accuracy or anteversion accuracy or precision was detected between groups. And 83% of components were placed within the target range. There was no relationship between obesity (dichotomized) and component placement outside the target ranges for inclination, anteversion, or both. As a continuous variable, increased body mass index correlated with higher odds of inclination outside the target zone (odds ratio, 1.06; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Using imageless navigation, inclination orientation was less precise for obese patients, but the observed difference is likely not clinically relevant. Accurate superficial registration of landmarks in obese patients is achievable, and the use of imageless navigation similarly improves acetabular component positioning in obese and nonobese patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV.
BACKGROUND:Obesity is a risk factor for acetabular component malposition when total hip arthroplasty is performed with manual techniques. The utility of imageless navigation in obesepatients remains unknown. This study compared the accuracy and precision of imageless navigation for component orientation between obese and nonobese patients. METHODS: A total of 459 total hip arthroplasties performed for osteoarthritis using imageless navigation were reviewed from a single surgeon's institutional review board-approved database. Einzel-Bild-Roentgen Analyse determined component orientation on 6-week postoperative anteroposterior radiographs. Mean orientation error (accuracy) and precision were compared between obese (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) and nonobese patients. Regression analysis evaluated the influence of obesity on component position. RESULTS: The difference in mean inclination and anteversion between obese and nonobese groups was 1.1° (43.0° ± 3.5°; range, 35.8°-57.8° vs 41.9° ± 4.4°; range, 33.0°-57.1° and 24.9° ± 6.3°; range, 14.2°-44.3° vs 23.8° ± 6.6°; range, 7.0°-38.6°, respectively). Inclination precision was better for nonobese patients. No difference in inclination accuracy or anteversion accuracy or precision was detected between groups. And 83% of components were placed within the target range. There was no relationship between obesity (dichotomized) and component placement outside the target ranges for inclination, anteversion, or both. As a continuous variable, increased body mass index correlated with higher odds of inclination outside the target zone (odds ratio, 1.06; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Using imageless navigation, inclination orientation was less precise for obesepatients, but the observed difference is likely not clinically relevant. Accurate superficial registration of landmarks in obesepatients is achievable, and the use of imageless navigation similarly improves acetabular component positioning in obese and nonobese patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV.