header advert
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

Hip

IMPROVING ACETABULAR COMPONENT INCLINATION IN TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY BY USING A DIGITAL PROTRACTOR

British Hip Society meeting (BHS) March 2016



Abstract

Introduction

In total hip arthroplasty (THA), a high radiographic inclination angle (RI) of the acetabular component has been linked to an increased dislocation rate, liner fracture, and increased wear. In contrast to version, we have more proven boundaries when it comes to a safe zone for angles of RI. Although intuitively it seems easier to achieve a target RI, most studies demonstrate a lack of accuracy and the trend towards a high RI with all surgical approaches when using a freehand technique or a mechanical guide. This is due to pelvic motion during surgery, which can be highly variable.

The current study had two primary aims, each with a different primary outcome. The first aim was to determine how accurate a surgeon could obtain the target operative inclination (OI) during THA when using a cementless cup using a digital protractor. The second aim was to determine how accurate a surgeon can estimate the target OI to obtain a RI of 40° based on the patient's hip circumference as demonstrated in a previous study.

Methods

In this prospective study, we included 200 consecutive patients undergoing uncemented primary THA in the lateral decubitus position using a posterior approach. Preoperatively, the surgeon determined the target OI based on the patient's hip circumference (22.5°, 25°, 27.5° or 30°). Intraoperatively, the effective OI was measured with the aid of a digital inclinometer after seating of the acetabular component. Six weeks postoperatively anteroposterior pelvic radiographs were made and two evaluators, blinded to the effective OI, measured the RI of the acetabular component. The safe zone for inclination was defined as 30°-45° of inclination.

Results

The mean difference between the target OI and the effective OI of the acetabular component was −0.7° SD 1.4 (95% CI −0.9° to −0.5°). The difference between the target and effective OI was less than 1° in 108 patients (54%), less than 2° in 160 patients (80%) and less than 3° in 186 patients (93%). In 14 patients (7%) the difference was 3°-5°. The mean RI was 37.9° SD 4.7 (95% CI 37.2° to 38.5°). The mean difference between the RI and effective OI was 11.5° SD 4.7 (95% CI 10.8° to 12.1°). Overall, 188 cups (94%) were within the inclination safe zone. When analysing the RI outliers, 1 could have be avoided if a better target OI was chosen and 2 could have been avoided if the difference between the target and effective OI would have been smaller. For the remaining 9 outliers (75%) the difference between the RI and effective OI was in the upper and lower 7th percentile, indicating more or less than average motion of the pelvis in these patients.

Discussion and Conclusions

When using a digital protractor, the mean difference between the target OI and the effective OI of the acetabular component was less than 3° in 93% and less than 5° in all patients. The use of a digital protractor allows surgeons to accurately implant the acetabular component in the desired OI in a cheap and easy way. By adjusting the target OI based on the patient's hip circumference, 94% of the acetabular components were placed within an inclination safe zone of 30°-45°. Most outliers were caused by more of less than average intraoperative pelvic motion.