Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 7 | Pages 360 - 367
1 Jul 2020
Kawahara S Hara T Sato T Kitade K Shimoto T Nakamura T Mawatari T Higaki H Nakashima Y

Aims. Appropriate acetabular component placement has been proposed for prevention of postoperative dislocation in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Manual placements often cause outliers in spite of attempts to insert the component within the intended safe zone; therefore, some surgeons routinely evaluate intraoperative pelvic radiographs to exclude excessive acetabular component malposition. However, their evaluation is often ambiguous in case of the tilted or rotated pelvic position. The purpose of this study was to develop the computational analysis to digitalize the acetabular component orientation regardless of the pelvic tilt or rotation. Methods. Intraoperative pelvic radiographs of 50 patients who underwent THA were collected retrospectively. The 3D pelvic bone model and the acetabular component were image-matched to the intraoperative pelvic radiograph. The radiological anteversion (RA) and radiological inclination (RI) of the acetabular component were calculated and those measurement errors from the postoperative CT data were compared relative to those of the 2D measurements. In addition, the intra- and interobserver differences of the image-matching analysis were evaluated. Results. Mean measurement errors of the image-matching analyses were significantly small (2.5° (SD 1.4°) and 0.1° (SD 0.9°) in the RA and RI, respectively) relative to those of the 2D measurements. Intra- and interobserver differences were similarly small from the clinical perspective. Conclusion. We have developed a computational analysis of acetabular component orientation using an image-matching technique with small measurement errors compared to visual evaluations regardless of the pelvic tilt or rotation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(7):360–367


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1280 - 1288
1 Oct 2018
Grammatopoulos G Gofton W Cochran M Dobransky J Carli A Abdelbary H Gill HS Beaulé PE

Aims

This study aims to: determine the difference in pelvic position that occurs between surgery and radiographic, supine, postoperative assessment; examine how the difference in pelvic position influences subsequent component orientation; and establish whether differences in pelvic position, and thereafter component orientation, exist between total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed in the supine versus the lateral decubitus positions.

Patients and Methods

The intra- and postoperative anteroposterior pelvic radiographs of 321 THAs were included; 167 were performed with the patient supine using the anterior approach and 154 were performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus using the posterior approach. The inclination and anteversion of the acetabular component was measured and the difference (Δ) between the intra- and postoperative radiographs was determined. The target zone was inclination/anteversion of 40°/20° (± 10°). Changes in the tilt, rotation, and obliquity of the pelvis on the intra- and postoperative radiographs were calculated from Δinclination/anteversion using the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 93-B, Issue SUPP_IV | Pages 474 - 474
1 Nov 2011
Murphy S Chow JC Eckman K Jaramaz B
Full Access

Introduction: Malposition of the pelvis at the time of acetabular component insertion can contribute to malpositioning of the acetabular component. This study measures the variation in intraoperative positioning of the pelvis on the operating table during surgery by matching intraoperative radiographs with pre-operative computed tomograms (CT) using 2D-3D matching. Methods: This prospective study was comprised of a random sample of 45 patients (n = 45, 26 female, 19 male) who had received a total hip arthroplasty (THA) from a single surgeon from 10/21/2003 to 9/6/2007. No THA candidate was excluded for any reason, including body habitus (mean BMI = 27.7, range 17.5 – 42.3), underlying disease process, age (mean age at surgery = 57, range 27 – 80), sex or side of surgery (21 left THAs, 24 right THAs). According to our standard clinical treatment protocol, each patient had a pre-operative CT scan for CT-based surgical navigation of the hip arthroplasty and each patient had an intraoperative radiograph taken to assess component positioning. All THAs were performed in the lateral decubitus position on a radiolucent peg-board positioning device. Each patient’s intraoperative pelvic radiograph was taken after acetabular component and trial femoral component insertion with the leg placed in a neutral position on the operating table and with the xray plate aligned squarely with the operating table. The orientation of the pelvis on the operating table was calculated by comparing the intraoperative 2D projection to the 3D CT dataset using software that can perform 2D-3D matching (XAlign). This software has been validated previously. By matching the 3D CT dataset to the magnification and orientation of the plain radiograph, the position of the anterior pelvic plane relative to the operating table could be calculated. Results: The mean pelvic tilt (rotation around the medial-lateral axis) was 6.84 degrees of anterior pelvic tilt (lordosis) with a standard deviation of 7.95 degrees and a range from 27.24 degrees of lordosis to 4.96 degrees of kyphosis. The mean pelvic obliquity (rotation around the longitudinal axis) was 2.89 degrees anterior from neutral with a standard deviation of 9.44 degrees and a range from 29.36 anterior to 16.59 posterior from neutral. The mean pelvic rotation (rotation around the anterior-posterior axis) was 2.56 degrees cephelad, with a standard deviation of 4.10 degrees and a range from 10.88 degrees cephalad to 5.97 degrees caudad. Pearson correlation statistics showed no relation among pelvic position and body mass index or age. A correlation was seen between pelvic obliquity and pelvic rotation. Conclusion: This study shows a high variability of intraoperative pelvic positioning in the clinical setting using accurate measurement tools. The greatest variation was seen in pelvic obliquity which has the greatest influence on anteversion/retroversion of the acetabular component. Additionally, pelvic obliquity and rotation appear related in our series. Since all of our intraoperative radiographs were taken with the leg in a neutral position, it is likely that the pelvis is even more greatly malpositioned at other times during the surgery when forces applied by retractors or upon the leg may be greater


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 92-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 110 - 110
1 Mar 2010
Murphy S Chow JC Eckman K Jaramaz B
Full Access

INTRODUCTION: Malposition of the pelvis at the time of acetabular component insertion can contribute to malpositioning of the acetabular component. This study measures the variation in intraoperative positioning of the pelvis on the operating table during surgery by matching intraoperative radiographs with pre-operative computed tomograms (CT) using 2D-3D matching. METHODS: This prospective study was comprised of a random sample of 45 patients (n = 45, 26 female, 19 male) who had received a total hip arthroplasty (THA) from a single surgeon from 10/21/2003 to 9/6/2007. No THA candidate was excluded for any reason, including body habitus (mean BMI = 27.7, range 17.5 – 42.3), underlying disease process, age (mean age at surgery = 57, range 27 – 80), sex or side of surgery (21 left THAs, 24 right THAs). According to our standard clinical treatment protocol, each patient had a pre-operative CT scan for CT-based surgical navigation of the hip arthroplasty and each patient had an intraoperative radiograph taken to assess component positioning. All THAs were performed in the lateral decubitus position on a radiolucent peg-board positioning device. Each patient’s intraoperative pelvic radiograph was taken after acetabular component and trial femoral component insertion with the leg placed in a neutral position on the operating table and with the xray plate aligned squarely with the operating table. The orientation of the pelvis on the operating table was calculated by comparing the intraoperative 2D projection to the 3D CT data-set using software that can perform 2D-3D matching (XAlign). This software has been validated previously. By matching the 3D CT dataset to the magnification and orientation of the plain radiograph, the position of the anterior pelvic plane relative to the operating table could be calculated. RESULTS: The mean pelvic tilt (rotation around the medial-lateral axis) was 6.84 degrees of anterior pelvic tilt (lordosis) with a standard deviation of 7.95 degrees and a range from 27.24 degrees of lordosis to 4.96 degrees of kyphosis. The mean pelvic obliquity (rotation around the longitudinal axis) was 2.89 degrees anterior from neutral with a standard deviation of 9.44 degrees and a range from 29.36 anterior to 16.59 posterior from neutral. The mean pelvic rotation (rotation around the anterior-posterior axis) was 2.56 degrees cephelad, with a standard deviation of 4.10 degrees and a range from 10.88 degrees cephalad to 5.97 degrees caudad. Pearson correlation statistics showed no relation among pelvic position and body mass index or age. A correlation was seen between pelvic obliquity and pelvic rotation. CONCLUSION: This study shows a high variability of intraoperative pelvic positioning in the clinical setting using accurate measurement tools. The greatest variation was seen in pelvic obliquity which has the greatest influence on anteversion/retroversion of the acetabular component. Additionally, pelvic obliquity and rotation appear related in our series. Since all of our intraoperative radiographs were taken with the leg in a neutral position, it is likely that the pelvis is even more greatly malpositioned at other times during the surgery when forces applied by retractors or upon the leg may be greater