To date, the literature has not yet revealed superiority of Minimally Invasive (MI) approaches over conventional techniques. We performed a systematic review to determine whether minimally invasive approaches are superior to conventional approaches in total hip arthroplasty for (1) clinical and (2) functional outcomes. We performed a meta-analysis of level 1 evidence to determine whether (3) minimally invasive approaches are superior to conventional approaches for clinical outcomes.

All studies comparing MI approaches to conventional approaches were eligible for analysis. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to throughout this study. Registries were searched using the following MeSH terms: ‘minimally invasive’, ‘muscle-sparing’, ‘THA’, ‘THR’, ‘hip arthroplasty’ and ‘hip replacement’. Locations searched included PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU clinical trials register and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (World Health Organisation).

Twenty studies were identified. There were 1,282 MI THAs and 1,351 conventional THAs performed.

Intermuscular MI approaches are equivalent to conventional THA approaches when considering all-cause revision, aseptic revision, infection, dislocation, fracture rates and functional outcomes. Meta-analysis of level 1 evidence supports this claim.

The benefits of HXLPE in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have not been as evident as total hip arthroplasty (THA). A systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of highly-crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) on TKA outcomes compared to conventional polyethylene (CPE) is described.

All studies comparing HXLPE with CPE for primary TKA were included for analysis. The minimum dataset included revision rates, indication for revision, aseptic component loosening and follow-up time. The primary outcome variables were all-cause revision, aseptic revision, revision for loosening, radiographic component loosening, osteolysis and incidence of radiolucent lines. Secondary outcome measures included postoperative functional knee scores. A random-effects meta-analysis allowing for all missing data was performed for all primary outcome variables.

Six studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, there were 2,234 knees (1,105 HXLPE and 1,129 CPE). The combined mean follow-up for all studies was 6 years. The aseptic revision rate in the HXLPE group was 1.02% compared to 1.97% in the CPE group. There was no difference in the rate of all-cause revision (p = 0.131), aseptic revision (p = 0.298) or revision for component loosening (p = 0.206) between the two groups. Radiographic loosening (p = 0.200), radiolucent lines (p = 0.123) and osteolysis (p = 0.604) was similar between both groups. Functional outcomes were similar between groups.

The use of HXLPE in TKA yields similar results for clinical and radiographic outcomes when compared to CPE at midterm follow-up. HXLPE does not confer the same advantages to TKA as seen in THA.

Tourniquet use in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a subject of considerable debate. A recent study questioned the need for tourniquets based on associated risks. However, the study omitted analysis of crucial tourniquet-related parameters which have been demonstrated in numerous studies to be associated with safe tourniquet use and reduction of adverse events. The current utilization and preferences of tourniquet use in Canada remain unknown. Our primary aim was to determine the current practices, patterns of use, and opinions of tourniquet use in TKA among members of the Canadian Arthroplasty Society (CAS). Additionally, we sought to determine the need for updated best practice guidelines to inform optimal tourniquet use and to identify areas requiring further research.

A self-administered survey was emailed to members of the CAS in October 2021(six-week period). The response rate was 57% (91/161). Skip logic branching was used to administer a maximum of 59 questions related to tourniquet use, beliefs, and practices. All respondents were staff surgeons and 88% were arthroplasty fellowship trained. Sixty-five percent have been in practice for ≥11 years and only 16% for 50 TKA/year, 59% have an academic practice, and >67% prefer cemented TKA.

Sixty-six percent currently use tourniquets, 25% no longer do but previously did, and 9% never used tourniquets. For those not using tourniquets, the most common reasons are potential harm/risks and publications/conferences. Among current users, 48% use in all cases and an additional 37% use in 76-99% of cases. The top reason for use was improved visualization/bloodless field (88%), followed by performing a cemented TKA, used in training, and faster operative times. The main patient factor influencing selective tourniquet use was peripheral vascular disease and main surgical factors were operative duration and cementless TKA. The most frequent adverse events reported were bruising/pinching under the tourniquet and short-term pain, which majority believed were related to improper tourniquet use (prolonged time, high-pressures, poor cuff fit), yet only 8% use contoured tourniquets and 32% don't use limb protection. Despite substantial evidence in literature that tourniquet safety and probability of harm are affected by tourniquet time and pressure, only 83% and 72% of respondents believe reducing tourniquet time and pressure respectively reduce the probability of harm. In addition, no surgeon utilizes personalized limb occlusion pressure which has been demonstrated to substantially reduce tourniquet pressure while being safe and effective. Furthermore, 62% always use fixed pressure and 37% will modify the pressure based on patient parameters, most often systolic blood pressure and limb size. Almost all (88%) were interested in new evidence-based guidelines regarding these parameters.

Tourniquet use in TKA remains prevalent among arthroplasty surgeons in the CAS; however tremendous practice variability regarding several key parameters required for optimal use exists. Current best practices of tourniquet use regarding personalized pressures, time, and type are not being utilized across Canada. There is considerable interest and need for further research and updated guidelines regarding key parameters of safe tourniquet usage to optimize tourniquet use in TKA.

Hip resurfacing may be a useful surgical procedure when patient selection is correct and only implants with superior performance are used. In order to establish a body of evidence in relation to hip resurfacing, pseudotumour formation and its genetic predisposition, we performed a case-control study investigating the role of HLA genotype in the development of pseudotumour around MoM hip resurfacings.

All metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacings performed in the history of the institution were assessed. A total of 392 hip resurfacings were performed by 12 surgeons between February 1st 2005 and October 31st 2007. In all cases, pseudotumour was confirmed in the preoperative setting on Metal Artefact Reduction Sequencing (MARS) MRI. Controls were matched by implant (ASR or BHR) and absence of pseudotumour was confirmed on MRI. Blood samples from all cases and controls underwent genetic analysis using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) assessing for the following alleles of 11 HLA loci (A, B, C, DRB1, DRB3/4/5, DQA1, DQB1, DPB1, DPA1). Statistical significance was determined using a Fisher's exact test or Chi-Squared test given the small sample size to quantify the clinical association between HLA genotype and the need for revision surgery due to pseudotumour.

Both groups were matched for implant type (55% ASR, 45% BHR in both the case and control groups). According to the ALVAL histological classification described by Kurmis et al., the majority of cases (63%, n=10) were found to have group 2 histological findings. Four cases (25%) had group 3 histological findings and 2 (12%) patients had group 4 findings. Of the 11 HLA loci analysed, 2 were significantly associated with a higher risk of pseudotumour formation (DQB1*05:03:01 and DRB1*14:54:01) and 4 were noted to be protective against pseudotumour formation (DQA1*03:01:01, DRB1*04:04:01, C*01:02:01, B*27:05:02).

These findings further develop the knowledge base around specific HLA genotypes and their role in the development of pseudotumour formation in MoM hip resurfacing. Specifically, the two alleles at higher risk of pseudotumour formation (DQB1*05:03:01 and DRB1*14:54:01) in MoM hip resurfacing should be noted, particularly as patient-specific genotype-dependent surgical treatments continue to develop in the future.

The benefit of using acetabular screws in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been questioned in recent years. The disadvantages of using screws include increased operative time, risk of injury to surrounding neurovascular structures and metal ware breakage. Recent large registry studies have reported that screws do not confer a protective effect against acetabular loosening or the presence of osteolysis. Other studies have even described an increased risk of aseptic acetabular loosening with the selective use of screws. We report findings from a multicentre cohort study.

This large cohort study compared clinical outcomes between primary acetabular components that were inserted with and without screws. Independent variables included the presence (or absence) of screws, the total number of screws used and the cumulative screw length (CSL). Outcome measures included all-cause revision, acetabular component revision and acetabular component loosening. Statistical software (Stata/IC 13.1 for Mac [64-bit Intel]) was used to conduct all statistical analyses. A p-value < 0 .05 taken to be significant.

There were 4,583 THAs performed in total. Screws were used in 15.9% (n=733). At a mean follow-up of 5.2 years, the all-cause revision rate in the screw cohort was 1.5% compared to 0.83% in the no screw cohort (p=0.085). There was no difference in acetabular component revision rates for screws (3/733, 0.41%) versus no screws (12/3,850, 0.31%) (p=0.439). The rate of acetabular loosening noted during the time of revision surgery was significantly higher when screws were used in the index procedure (2/733, 0.2%) compared to the no screw cohort (1/3,850, 0.02%) (p=0.017). There was no difference in outcomes when stratifying by the number of screws used or the cumulative screw length.

Primary acetabular components do not require screws for fixation. All cause revision rates and acetabular component revision rates are comparable for the screw and the no screw cohorts. The rate of acetabular component loosening, as observed during revision surgery, is significantly higher when screws are used in the index total hip replacement.

The demand for revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has grown significantly in recent years. The two major fixation methods for stems in revision TKA include cemented and ‘hybrid’ fixation. We explore the optimal fixation method using data from recent, well-designed comparative studies.

We performed a systematic review of comparative studies published within the last 10 years with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. To allow for missing data, a random-effects meta-analysis of all available cases was performed. The odds ratio (OR) for the relevant outcome was calculated with 95% confidence intervals. The effects of small studies were analyzed using a funnel plot, and asymmetry was assessed using Egger's test. The primary outcome measure was all-cause failure. Secondary outcome measures included all-cause revision, aseptic revision and radiographic failure.

There was a significantly lower failure rate for hybrid stems when compared to cemented stems (p = 0.006) (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.87). Heterogeneity was 4.3% and insignificant (p = 0.39). There was a trend toward superior hybrid performance for all other outcome measures including all-cause re-revision, aseptic re-revision and radiographic failure.

Recent evidence suggests a significantly lower failure rate for hybrid stems in revision TKA. There is also a trend favoring the use of hybrid stems for all outcome variables assessed in this study. This is the first time a significant difference in outcome has been demonstrated through systematic review of these two modes of stem fixation. We therefore recommend the use, where possible, of hybrid stems in revision TKA.

Robotic and navigated TKA procedures have been introduced to improve component placement precision for the purpose of improving implant survivorship and other clinical outcomes. Although numerous studies have shown enhanced precision in placing components, adoption of technology-assistance (TA) for TKA has been relatively slow. One reason for this has been the difficulty in demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of implementing TA-TKA systems and assessing their impact on revision rates.

In this study, we aimed to use a simulation approach to answer the following questions: (1) Can we determine the distribution of likely reductions in TKA revision rates attributable to TA-TKA in an average US patient population? And, (2) What reduction in TKA revision rates are required to achieve economic neutrality?

In a previous study, we developed a method for creating large sets of simulated TKA patient populations with distributions of patient-specific factors (age at index surgery, sex, BMI) and one surgeon-controlled factor (coronal alignment) drawn from registry data and published literature. Effect sizes of each factor on implant survival was modeled using large clinical studies. For 10,000 simulated TKA patients, we simulated 20,000 TKA surgeries, evenly split between groups representing coronal alignment precisions reported for manual (±3°) and TA-TKA (±1.0°), calculating the patient-specific survival curve for each group. Extending our previous study, we incorporated the probability of each patient's expected survival into our model using publicly available actuarial data. This allowed us to calculate a patient-specific estimate of the Reduction in Lifetime Risk of Revision (RLRR) for each simulated patient. Our analysis showed that 90% of patients will achieve an RLRRof 1.5% or less in an average US TKA population.

We then conducted a simplified economic analysis with the goal of determining the net cost of using TA-TKA per case when factoring in future savings by TKA revision rates. We assumed an average cost of revision surgery to be $75,000 as reported by Delanois (2017) and an average added cost incurred by TA-TKA to be $6,000 per case as reported by Antonis (2019). We estimate the net cost per TA-TKA case (C_Net) to be the added cost per TA-TKA intervention (C_Int), less the cost of revision surgery (C_Rev) multiplied by the estimated RLRR: C_Net = C_Int - C_Rev∗RLRR. We find that, under these assumptions, use of TA-TKA increases expected costs for all patients with an RLRR of under 8%.

Based on these results, it appears that it would not be cost-effective to use TA-TKA on more than a small fraction of the typical US TKA patient population if the goal is to reduce overall costs through reducing revision risks. However, we note that this simulation does not consider other possible reported benefits of TA-TKA surgery, such as improved functional and pain outcome scores which may justify its use on other grounds. Alternative costs incurred by TA-TKA will be evaluated in a future study. To reach economic neutrality, TA-TKA systems either must reduce the added cost per intervention or increase RLRR by better addressing the root causes of revision.

It is unclear why ACL rupture increases osteoarthritis risk, regardless of ACL reconstruction. Our aims were: 1) to establish the reliability and accuracy of a direct method of determining tibiofemoral contact in vivo with UO-MRI, 2) to assess differences in knees with ACL rupture treated nonoperatively versus operatively, and 3) to assess differences in knees with ACL rupture versus healthy knees.

We recruited a convenience sample of patients with prior ACL rupture. Inclusion criteria were: 1) adult participants between 18–50 years old; 2) unilateral, isolated ACL rupture within the last five years; 3) if reconstructed, done within one year from injury; 4) intact cartilage; and 5) completed a graduated rehabilitation program culminating in return to sport or recreational activities. Participants were excluded if they had other ligament ruptures, osteoarthritis, an incompletely rehabilitated injury, were prohibited from undergoing MRI, or had a history of ACL re-rupture. Using the UO-MRI, we investigated tibiofemoral contact area, centroid location, and six degrees of freedom alignment under standing, weightbearing conditions with knees extended. We compared patients with ACL rupture treated nonoperatively versus operatively, and ACL ruptured knees versus healthy control knees. We assessed reliability using the intra-class correlation coefficient, and accuracy by comparing UO-MRI contact area with a 7Tesla MRI reference standard. We used linear mixed-effects models to test the effects of ACL rupture and ACL reconstruction on contact area. We used a paired t test for centroid location and alignment differences in ACL ruptured knees versus control knees, and the independent t test for differences between ACL reconstruction and no reconstruction. Analyses were performed using R version 3.5.1. We calculated sample size based on a previous study that showed a contact area standard deviation of 13.6mm2, therefore we needed eight or more knees per group to detect a minimum contact area change of 20mm2with 80% power and an α of 0.05.

We recruited 18 participants with ACL rupture: eight treated conservatively and 10 treated with ACL reconstruction. There were no significant differences between the operative and nonoperative ACL groups in terms of age, gender, BMI, time since injury, or functional knee scores (IKDC and KOOS). The UO-MRI demonstrated excellent inter-rater, test-retest, and intra-rater reliability with ICCs for contact area and centroid location ranging from 0.83–1.00. Contact area measurement was accurate to within 5% measurement error. At a mean 2.7 years after injury, we found that ACL rupture was associated with a 10.4% larger medial and lateral compartment contact areas (P=0.001), with the medial centroid located 5.2% more posterior (P=0.001). The tibiae of ACL ruptured knees were 2.3mm more anterior (P=0.003), and 2.6° less externally rotated (P=0.010) relative to the femur, than contralateral control knees. We found no differences between ACL reconstructed and nonreconstructed knees.

ACL rupture was associated with significant mechanical changes 2.7 years out from injury, which ACL reconstruction did not restore. These findings may partially explain the equivalent risk of post-traumatic osteoarthritis in patients treated operatively and nonoperatively after ACL rupture.

Introduction

Innovations in surgical robotics and navigation have significantly improved implant placement accuracy in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, many comparative studies have not been shown to substantially improve revision rates or other clinical outcome scores. We conducted a simulation study based on the reported distribution of patient-specific characteristics and estimated potential effect of coronal plane alignment (CPA) on risk of revision to evaluate the hypothesis that most published study designs in this area have been too underpowered to detect improvements in revision rates.

Cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (cam-FAI) can be treated with femoral neck osteochondroplasty to increase the clearance between the femoral head/neck and the acetabular rim. Because femur-acetabulum contact is very difficult to assess directly in patients, it is not clear if this surgery achieves its objective of reducing femur-acetabulum contact, and it is not clear how much of the femoral head/neck region should be resected to allow clearance in all activities.

Our research question was: “Does femoral neck osteochondroplasty increase femur-acetabulum clearance in an extreme hip posture in patients with cam FAI?”

We recruited 8 consecutive patients scheduled to undergo arthroscopic femoral neck osteochondroplasty to treat cam-type FAI. We assessed clearance between the acetabulum and the femoral neck before surgery and at 6 months post-op using an upright open MRI scanner that allowed the hip to be scanned in flexed postures. We scanned each subject in a supine hip flexion (90 degree), adduction and internal rotation (FADIR) posture. We measured the beta angle, which describes clearance between the acetabular rim and the femoral head/neck deformity.

Osteochondroplasty increased clearance from a mean beta angle of −9.4 degrees (SD 19.3) to 4.4 degrees (SD 16.2°) (p<0.05).

This finding suggests that femoral neck osteochondroplasty increases femur-acetabulum clearance substantially for a posture widely accepted to provoke symptoms in patients with cam-FAI.

In revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), acetabular reconstruction while dealing with severe bone loss is a challenge. The porous tantalum revision acetabular shells have been in use for the past decade. Several reports have documented successful use at early to mid-term follow up. There is, however, very little literature around the long-term survival and quality of life outcome with the use of these shells.

We reviewed the results of 46 acetabular revisions with Paprosky 2 and 3 acetabular bone defects reconstructed with a hemispheric, tantalum acetabular shell and multiple supplementary screws. There were 31 females. Average age at revision was 64 years (range 23–85 years). The mean and median follow up was 11 years (range 10–12 years, SD 1). Morselised femoral allograft was used in 34 hips to fill contained cavitary defectes. Bulk femoral allografting was performed in 2 hips.

At a minimum follow-up of 10 (range 10–12) years, the survivorship of the porous tantalum acetabular shell, with revision of the shell as end point was 96%. The minimum 10-year survivorship with hip revision for any reason as end point was 92%. We noted excellent pain relief (mean WOMAC pain 92.6) and good functional outcome (mean WOMAC function 90.3, mean UCLA 5); and generic quality of life measures (mean SF-12 physical component 48.3; mean SF-12 mental component 56.7). Patient satisfaction with pain relief, function and return to recreational activities were noted to be excellent.

Cementless acetabular revision with the tantalum acetabular shell demonstrated excellent clinical and quality of life outcomes at minimum 10-year follow-up. As far as we are aware this is the first report of minimum 10-year follow up of use of this technique for revision hip arthroplasty.

Revision surgery for pelvic discontinuity in the presence of bone loss is challenging. The cup-cage reconstruction option has become popular for the management of pelvic discontinuity in the recent years. The aim of this study was to review the clinical, radiological and patient reported outcomes with the use of cup cage construct for pelvic discontinuity at our institution.

Twenty-seven patients (27 cup-cage reconstructions) were identified at median 6-year (minimum 2 year, maximum 10 years) follow up. Eight were female patients. The median age was 77 years [mean 72, range 37–90, SD 13.6]. There were 5 deaths and 2 were lost to follow up.

Two patients were converted to excision arthroplasty; one for infection and one for failure of the construct. A further 3 patients required revision for instability but the cup cage construct was not revised (2 revisions of cemented cups to a constrained cup and one revision of proximal modular component of the femoral prosthesis). Revision of the cup cage construct was not necessary in any of these cases. We noted excellent pain relief (mean WOMAC pain 85.6) and good functional outcome (mean WOMAC function 78.2, mean UCLA 5, mean OHS 78.6). Patient satisfaction with regards pain relief; function and return to activities were noted to be excellent. Radiological changes were noted in further 4 patients (cup migration in one case; fracture of ischial spike in one case and breakage of the cage screws in 2 patients). No migration of the construct was noted in any of the cases.

In conclusion, the cup cage construct is an excellent method of dealing with complex pelvic discontinuity. Our study suggests a low failure rate; high patient satisfaction and pain relief and moderate functional outcome at median 6 year follow up.

Modular total hip arthroplasty (MTHA) stems were introduced in order to provide increased intra-operative flexibility for restoring hip biomechanics, improving stability and potentially reducing revision risk. However, the additional interface at the neck-body junction provides another location for corrosion or mechanical failure of the stem. To delineate the mid term revision risk of MTHA stems, we examined data from the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry (CJRR) at the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI).

Kinectiv, Profemur and Rejuvenate modular stems were identified from CJRR records submitted between 2004 and 2014. Revision status was determined by examining the discharge abstract database (DAD) also housed by CIHI, which collects information on all revisions, regardless of whether the procedure was submitted to CJRR.

A total of 2446 modular stems were identified with a mean follow up of 4.2 years (range 0 to 10). Their usage peaked in 2012 (the first year of mandatory CJRR form submission for BC, ON and MB), and dropped rapidly thereafter. A total of 155 (6.3%) were revised. This consisted of 5/301 Kinectiv (1.7%), 141/2050 ProFemur (6.9%), and 9/96 Rejuvenate (9.4%) stems. As a group, this falls below the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines of 95% survival at 10 years.

While MTHA stems were introduced to improve outcomes and reduce revision risk, our findings of a 6.3% revision risk at a mean follow up of 4.2 years does not appear to support this.

Accurate comparison of outcomes regarding various surgical options in knee arthroplasty calls for an improved method of joint line analysis that takes into account the preoperative cartilage thickness. Current methods for measuring joint lines have limitations. This is commonly done on anteroposterior or lateral radiographs, by measuring landmarks defining the joint line with reference to a common landmark such as the fibular head, the medial femoral epicondyle or the tibial tuberosity. These radiographic methods are unable to measure important differences between the medial and lateral joint lines. Furthermore, poor accuracies due to sensitivity to patient and X-ray beam positions have been reported for these methods. The aim of this study was to introduce a method to measure the joint line shift for any desired flexion angle of the joint by taking into account the cartilage thickness on both the medial and lateral sides and under weightbearing conditions.

The suggested method inludes four steps (Figure 1): a) preoperative joint imaging and 3D-2D matching between pre-operative 3D models and bi-planar 2D images; b) postoperative joint imaging and 3D-2D matching between implant 3D models and 3D models of the bones to bi-planar 2D images; c) superimposition of the locations of the implant components on the preoperative joint positions to determine changes in the joint line on the medial and lateral sides of the joint for both extension and flexion positions.

To determine the tibial joint line, the three-dimensional model of the polyethylene inlay was added to the metal tray according to the design of its locking mechanism. Two-dimensional cross-sectional slices of the combined bone and implant models were obtained perpendicular to the tibial tray and passed through the most distal points of the medial and lateral condyles of the femoral component. Joint line shift was measured as the distance between the most distal point on the condyle of the femoral component and the most proximal point on the articular surface of the tibial polyethylene in the direction normal to the mediolateral edge of the tibial tray in the cross-sectional slice.

The method was tested on six cadaveric specimens. The joint line shift, measured using the new method, was in the range of −0.2 to 1.3 mm on average (SD=1.3 to 3.8 mm for medial and lateral, flexion and extension). This was significantly different (p≤0.01) from the results of a previously post-op based registration method which did not account for the cartilage thickness. These results demonstrate the importance of the preoperative joint space when analyzing the joint line, and highlight the utility of the newly introduced method. The method introduced in this study combines the preoperative and postoperative images to provide accurate 3D measures of joint line shifts. The method incorporates cartilage thickness in the analysis and is insensitive to patient and X-ray beam position, and can be applied at any flexion angle of the knee. The method yields much smaller measures of joint line shift than a previous approach, which suggests that the previous method may have overestimated joint line shift substantially.

INTRODUCTION

Poor acetabular cup orientation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) can cause dislocation and impingement, and lead to osteolysis (Little et al., 2009) and inflammatory soft tissue reactions (Haan et al., 2008). While the intrinsic accuracy of cup positioning in navigation is reported as low as 1° (Parratte et al., 2009), a large anterior pelvic tilt may lead to an offset of the same magnitude in the final cup anteversion (Wolf et al., 2005). The objectives of this study are to demonstrate feasibility of a new, non-invasive radiographic tool for accurate preoperative determination of a patient's specific pelvis angle, and intraoperative and postoperative assessment of the acetabular cup orientation with respect to boney landmarks.

INTRODUCTION

Rotational malalignment of the components in total knee arthroplasty has been linked to patellar maltracking, improper soft tissue balance, abnormal kinematics, premature wear of the polyethylene inlay, and subsequent clinical complications such as anterior knee pain (Barrack et al., 2001; Zihlmann et al., 2005; Lakstein at al., 2010). This study investigates an innovative image-based device that is designed to be used along with an intraoperative Isocentric (ISO-C) 3D imaging C-arm, and the conventional surgical instruments for positioning the femoral component at accurate rotational alignment angles.

Introduction

The most common method for accurate kinematic analysis of the knee arthroplasty uses bi-planar fluoroscopy and model-based RSA. The main challenge is to have access to reverse-engineered CAD models of the implant components, if not provided by the company, making this method impractical for a clinical study involving many types or sizes of implants. An alternative could be to reconstruct the 3D primitive features of the implant, such as cylindrical pegs, flat surfaces and circular boundaries, based on their 2D projections. This method was applied by Kaptein et al. (2006) for hip implants. However, despite its broad potential, it has not yet been applied for studying TKA kinematics. This study develops a methodology for feature-based RSA of TKA and investigates the range of accuracies in comparison to model-based RSA.

Introduction

Poor clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be related to improper alignment of the components. The main challenge is the variability in biomechanical references, especially in cases of severe deformity or dysplasia, and in determining the surgical landmarks intraoperatively. An intraoperative imaging tool can be very useful to assess the alignments when there is still a chance for correction. We investigated, on cadaveric specimens, the accuracy of using iso-centric (ISO-C) imaging (that reconstructs 3D from multiple 2D fluoroscopic images) for this purpose.

Introduction

Achieving durable implant–host bone fixation is the major challenge in uncemented revision hip arthroplasty when significant bone stock deficiencies are encountered. The purpose of this study was to develop an experimental model which would simulate the clinical revision hip scenario and to determine the effects of alendronate coating on porous tantalum on gap filling and bone ingrowth in the experimental model.

Introduction

Despite advances in surgical technique and prosthetics there continues to be a number of patients who are dissatisfied with the results of their knee replacement procedure. The outcome after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been reported frequently with use of condition-specific measures, but patient satisfaction has not been well studied.