Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

26. THE EFFECT OF STEM LENGTH ON THE ALIGNMENT OF THE HUMERAL COMPONENT IN COMPUTER-ASSISTED TOTAL ELBOW ARTHROPLASTY



Abstract

Purpose: While computer-assisted techniques can improve the alignment of the implant articulation with the native structure, stem abutment in the intramedullary canal may impede achievement of this alignment. In the current study, the effect of a fixed valgus (6 degree) stemmed humeral component on the alignment of navigated total elbow arthroplasty was investigated. Our hypothesis was that implantation of a humeral component with a reduced stem length would be more accurate than implantation of the humeral component with a standard length stem.

Method: Thirteen cadaveric distal humeri were imaged using a CT scanner, and a 3D surface model was reconstructed from each scan. Implantation was performed using two implant configurations. The first set was unmodified (Regular) while the second set was modified by reducing the length of the humeral stem to 25% of the original stem (Reduced). A surface model of the humeral component was aligned with the flexion-extension (FE) axis of the CT-based surface model, which was registered to the landmarks of the physical humerus using the iterative closest point algorithm. Navigated implant positioning was based on aligning a 3D computer model calibrated to the implant with a 3D model registered to the distal humerus.

Results: Implant alignment error was significantly lower for the Reduced implant, averaging 1.3±0.5 mm in translation and 1.2±0.4° in rotation, compared with 1.9±1.1 mm and 3.6±2.1° for the Regular implant. Abutment of the implant stem with the medullary canal of the humerus prevented optimal alignment of the Regular humeral component as only four of the 13 implantations were aligned to within 2.0° using navigation.

Conclusion: These results demonstrate that a humeral component with a fixed valgus angulation cannot be accurately positioned in a consistent fashion within the medullary canal of the distal humerus without sacrificing alignment of the FE axis due to stem abutment. Improved accuracy of implant placement can be achieved by introducing a family of humeral components, with three valgus angulations of 0°, 4° and 8°. Based on humeral morphology for these specimens, 12 of the 13 implants may be positioned to within 2° of the native FE axis using one of these 3 valgus angulations.

Correspondence should be addressed to CEO Doug C. Thomson. Email: doug@canorth.org