Literature DB >> 35669033

Computer Navigation for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Reduces Dislocation Rates.

Abhinav K Sharma1, Zlatan Cizmic2, Kaitlin M Carroll3, Seth A Jerabek3, Wayne G Paprosky4, Peter K Sculco3, Alejandro Gonzalez Della Valle3, Ran Schwarzkopf5, David J Mayman3, Jonathan M Vigdorchik3.   

Abstract

Purpose: Computer navigation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) offers potential for more accurate placement of acetabular components, avoiding impingement, edge loading, and dislocation, all of which can necessitate revision THA (rTHA). Therefore, the use of computer navigation may be particularly beneficial in patients undergoing rTHA. The purpose of this study was to determine if the use of computer-assisted hip navigation reduces the rate of dislocation in patients undergoing rTHA.
Methods: A retrospective review of 72 patients undergoing computer-navigated rTHA between February 2016 and May 2017 was performed. Demographics, indications for revision, type of procedure performed, and incidence of postoperative dislocation were collected for all patients. Clinical follow-up was recorded at 3 months, 1 year and 2 years.
Results: All 72 patients (48% female; 52% male) were included for analysis. The mean age was 70.4 ± 11.2 years and mean BMI was 26.4 ± 5.2 kg/m2. 22 of 72 patients (31%) required a rTHA procedure due to instability resulting in dislocation. At 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years, there were no dislocations (0%). There was a significant reduction in dislocation rate after computer-navigated rTHA (0%) relative to that following primary THA in the same patient cohort (31%; p < 0.05).
Conclusion: Our study demonstrates a significant reduction in dislocation rate following rTHA with computer navigation. Although the cause of postoperative dislocation is often multifactorial, the use of computer navigation may help to curtail femoral and acetabular malalignment in rTHA. Level of Evidence: Level III: retrospective. © Indian Orthopaedics Association 2022.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Computer navigation; Dislocation; Revision total hip arthroplasty; Technology; Total hip arthroplasty

Year:  2022        PMID: 35669033      PMCID: PMC9123110          DOI: 10.1007/s43465-022-00606-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Orthop        ISSN: 0019-5413            Impact factor:   1.033


  29 in total

Review 1.  Computer simulation: how can it help the surgeon optimize implant position?

Authors:  Philip C Noble; Nobuhiko Sugano; James D Johnston; Matthew T Thompson; Michael A Conditt; Charles A Engh; Kenneth B Mathis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Reduced variability of acetabular cup positioning with use of an imageless navigation system.

Authors:  Michael Nogler; Oliver Kessler; Alexandra Prassl; Bill Donnelly; Robert Streicher; John B Sledge; Martin Krismer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Achieving stability and lower-limb length in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Keith R Berend; Scott M Sporer; Rafael J Sierra; Andrew H Glassman; Michael J Morris
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Total hip arthroplasty through a minimal posterior approach using imageless computer-assisted hip navigation.

Authors:  Richard L Wixson; Margot A MacDonald
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Total hip arthroplasty using imageless computer-assisted hip navigation: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Richard Lass; Bernd Kubista; Boris Olischar; Sophie Frantal; Reinhard Windhager; Alexander Giurea
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 4.757

6.  Revision total hip arthoplasty: factors associated with re-revision surgery.

Authors:  Monti Khatod; Guy Cafri; Maria C S Inacio; Alan L Schepps; Elizabeth W Paxton; Stefano A Bini
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty : an analysis of risk factors and treatment options.

Authors:  Gregory M Alberton; Whitney A High; Bernard F Morrey
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Comparative Epidemiology of Revision Arthroplasty: Failed THA Poses Greater Clinical and Economic Burdens Than Failed TKA.

Authors:  Kevin J Bozic; Atul F Kamath; Kevin Ong; Edmund Lau; Steve Kurtz; Vanessa Chan; Thomas P Vail; Harry Rubash; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  The John Charnley Award: risk factors for cup malpositioning: quality improvement through a joint registry at a tertiary hospital.

Authors:  Mark C Callanan; Bryan Jarrett; Charles R Bragdon; David Zurakowski; Harry E Rubash; Andrew A Freiberg; Henrik Malchau
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  The Otto Aufranc Award. Image guided navigation system to measure intraoperatively acetabular implant alignment.

Authors:  A M DiGioia; B Jaramaz; M Blackwell; D A Simon; F Morgan; J E Moody; C Nikou; B D Colgan; C A Aston; R S Labarca; E Kischell; T Kanade
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.