Preoperative planning for Total Hip Arthroplasty has been acknowledged as a vital step to facilitate a successful outcome. Templating ascertains the dimensions and positioning of the implants, minimizing both intraoperative and postoperative complications. The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of digital templating to acetate templating in the preoperative planning of Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Preoperative planning was performed on 40 consecutive patients (mean age = 70.5 years), undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty. Digital templating was performed by the Hip fellow 1, using Orthoview software (Jacksonville, FL, USA) and recorded the sizes of the cup and stem for each of the 40 patients. Subsequently, the same 40 patients were templated by Hip fellow 2, with X-rays done with a lead marker of known size by the side of the femur, using, acetate templating method. Templating results were compared to the actual sizes of the implants used, as noted in operative notes. Templating scores for the acetabular cup were 40% (16/40) with digital templating and 50% (20/40) with acetate templating. The templating scores for stem were 28% (11/40) with digital templating and 90% (36/40) with acetate templating. The differences between templating and actual implant sizes were plotted in Bland–Altman plot. Acetate templating proved to be statistically, significantly more accurate than digital templating (p value= 0.0083).

Our results indicate that the traditional acetate method is solid and valid to use for preoperative planning. This method is accurate and offers a more affordable option for preoperative templating. Although the templated size is one, there is a tendency to increase cup size to use bigger heads, which is the recent National Joint Registries trend. We recommend that acetate templating should be used as the default option.