Tyler Thorne1, Scott Nishioka2, Samantha Andrews3,4, Kristin Mathews2, Cass Nakasone2,5. 1. John A Burns School of Medicine, 651 Ilalo Street, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA. 2. Straub Medical Center, Bone and Joint Center, 888 South King Street, Honolulu, HI, 96818, USA. 3. Straub Medical Center, Bone and Joint Center, 888 South King Street, Honolulu, HI, 96818, USA. samantha.andrews@straub.net. 4. Department of Surgery, University of Hawai'i, John A. Burns School of Medicine, 1356 Lusitana Street, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA. samantha.andrews@straub.net. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Hawai'i, John A. Burns School of Medicine, 1356 Lusitana Street, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative fluoroscopy (IF) may increase accuracy of component placement when performing direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty (THA), however, unguided IF continues to produce inconsistent results. Supplementation of IF, with a digital grid (Grid) system or digital overlay (Overlay), may increase component placement accuracy. The purpose of this study was to compare component placement accuracy following THA when IF was supplemented with the Grid or Overlay technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Acetabular abduction and anteversion, with leg length discrepancy (LLD) and global hip offset (GHO) were retrospectively evaluated for unilateral and bilateral THA patients from 6-week post-operative radiographs. Target component placement were GHO and LLD < 10 mm, abduction 45° ± 10° and anteversion 15° ± 10° for Overlay and 17° ± 10° for Grid. Differences between the Overlay and Grid were determined by univariate analyses. RESULTS: The Overlay and Grid groups included 178 patients (217 hips) and 262 patients (317 hips), respectively. Target placement with the Overlay and Grid was achieved for GHO in 98.3% and 95.7% of cases (p = 0.108), LLD in 100% and 98.4% of cases (p = 0.121), cup abduction in 98.2% and 97.4% of cases (p = 0.384), and cup anteversion in 97.7% and 71.1% of cases (p < 0.001), respectively. Surgical time was significantly longer in Overlay compared to Grid (Unilateral 77.5 ± 14.1 min and 68.8 ± 12.2; p < 0.001; Bilateral 184.6 ± 27.0 min and 165.5 ± 23.1; p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although no difference was found between the Grid and the Overlay cohorts for LLD, GHO or abduction angle, the Overlay resulted in greater accuracy for acetabular component anteversion angle, with only a slight decrease in surgical efficiency.
INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative fluoroscopy (IF) may increase accuracy of component placement when performing direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty (THA), however, unguided IF continues to produce inconsistent results. Supplementation of IF, with a digital grid (Grid) system or digital overlay (Overlay), may increase component placement accuracy. The purpose of this study was to compare component placement accuracy following THA when IF was supplemented with the Grid or Overlay technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Acetabular abduction and anteversion, with leg length discrepancy (LLD) and global hip offset (GHO) were retrospectively evaluated for unilateral and bilateral THA patients from 6-week post-operative radiographs. Target component placement were GHO and LLD < 10 mm, abduction 45° ± 10° and anteversion 15° ± 10° for Overlay and 17° ± 10° for Grid. Differences between the Overlay and Grid were determined by univariate analyses. RESULTS: The Overlay and Grid groups included 178 patients (217 hips) and 262 patients (317 hips), respectively. Target placement with the Overlay and Grid was achieved for GHO in 98.3% and 95.7% of cases (p = 0.108), LLD in 100% and 98.4% of cases (p = 0.121), cup abduction in 98.2% and 97.4% of cases (p = 0.384), and cup anteversion in 97.7% and 71.1% of cases (p < 0.001), respectively. Surgical time was significantly longer in Overlay compared to Grid (Unilateral 77.5 ± 14.1 min and 68.8 ± 12.2; p < 0.001; Bilateral 184.6 ± 27.0 min and 165.5 ± 23.1; p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although no difference was found between the Grid and the Overlay cohorts for LLD, GHO or abduction angle, the Overlay resulted in greater accuracy for acetabular component anteversion angle, with only a slight decrease in surgical efficiency.
Authors: Kilian Rueckl; Diego J Alcaide; Bernhard Springer; Stefan Rueckl; Maximilian F Kasparek; Friedrich Boettner Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Ole-Christian L Brun; Helge N Sund; Lars Nordsletten; Stephan M Röhrl; Knut E Mjaaland Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2019-04-09 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Joshua S Bingham; Mark J Spangehl; Jeremy T Hines; Michael J Taunton; Adam J Schwartz Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2018-05-28 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Brandon S Beamer; Jordan H Morgan; Christopher Barr; Michael J Weaver; Mark S Vrahas Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-09-20 Impact factor: 4.176