Acetabular Revision Arthroplasty Based on 3-Dimensional Reconstruction Technology Using Jumbo Cups

Shen, Xianyue; Tian, Hao; Li, Yang; Zuo, Jianlin; Gao, Zhongli; Xiao, Jianlin

doi:10.3389/fbioe.2022.799443

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, if the decreased acetabular offset was not compensate and only the original femoral offset was restored, the global offset will be reduced. Several studies have reported that change of the hip centre affect the biomechanics of the hip 27 , 28 . To maintain global offset, medialization should theoretically be compensated for by an equivalent increase in femoral offset 10 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between two- and three-dimensional methods for offset measurements after total hip arthroplasty

Tone

Hasegawa

Naito

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare acetabular offset, femoral offset, and global offset measurements obtained after total hip arthroplasty (THA) between a two-dimensional (2D) method and a three-dimensional (3D) method. The subjects were 89 patients with unilateral osteoarthritis who underwent primary THA at our institution. Acetabular, femoral, and global offsets were measured by each of the 2D and 3D methods in native and implanted hips. In native hips, mean acetabular, femoral, and global offsets were 32.4 ± 3.3, 32.7 ± 4.5, 65.1 ± 5.7 mm, respectively, by the 2D method, and 32.3 ± 3.1, 38.1 ± 4.0, 70.4 ± 4.9 mm, respectively, by the 3D method. In implanted hips, mean acetabular, femoral, and global offsets were 27.6 ± 4.1, 33.8 ± 7.8, 61.4 ± 8.5 mm, respectively, by the 2D method, and 27.6 ± 3.9, 41.8 ± 6.2, 69.4 ± 7.2 mm, respectively, by the 3D method. There was significant difference in femoral and global offsets between the 2D and 3D methods in both native and implanted hips. Comparison of the 2D and 3D methods for evaluation of acetabular, femoral, and global offsets after THA clarified the usefulness and accuracy of the 3D method.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between two- and three-dimensional methods for offset measurements after total hip arthroplasty

Tone

Hasegawa

Naito

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Computer-aided technology has been successfully applied in orthopedic instrument design, materials and surgical simulation with mature technology applications (12)(13)(14). Previous studies have (15,16) used Mimics software to simulate the reconstruction of a high dislocated acetabulum, with an individualized and precise preoperative design to obtain satisfactory acetabular cup position and coverage and to avoid problems such as iliopsoas impingement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personalized digital simulation‑assisted acetabular component implantation in revision hip arthroplasty

Lao,

Liu,

Cheng

et al. 2024

Exp Ther Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of artificial total hip revision arthroplasties is increasing yearly in China, and >50% of these cases have acetabular defects. Accurately locating and quantifying the bone defect is one of the current challenges of this surgery. Thus, the objective of the present study was to simulate acetabular implantation with the aid of Mimics 17.0 software (Materialise NV) in patients with loosened acetabular prosthesis, to evaluate the ‘ideal acetabular center’ and the ‘actual acetabular center’ to guide the choice of prosthesis and surgical method. From January 2017 to June 2021, the present study included 10 hips from 10 patients [seven men (seven hips) and three women (three hips)]. In all patients, the Mimics software was applied to simulate the dislocation of the femoral prosthesis and acetabular prosthesis implantation before surgery; calculate the height difference between the ‘ideal acetabular center’ and the ‘actual acetabular center’ to assess the bone defect; confirm the size of the acetabular prosthesis, abduction angle, anteversion angle and bone coverage of the acetabular cup; and measure the intraoperative bleeding and postoperative follow-up Harris score of the hip joint. After statistical analysis, the present study revealed that digital simulation assistance could improve the accuracy of hip revision acetabular prosthesis implantation, reduce postoperative shortening of the affected limb, especially for surgeons with relatively little experience in hip revision surgery, and greatly reduce the occurrence of complications such as hip dislocation because of poor postoperative prosthesis position.

show abstract

Computational modeling of revision total hip arthroplasty involving acetabular defects: A systematic review

Hopkins,

Callary,

Solomon

et al. 2024

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) involving acetabular defects is a complex procedure associated with lower rates of success than primary THA. Computational modeling has played a key role in surgical planning and prediction of postoperative outcomes following primary THA, but modeling applications in rTHA for acetabular defects remain poorly understood. This study aimed to systematically review the use of computational modeling in acetabular defect classification, implant selection and placement, implant design, and postoperative joint functional performance evaluation following rTHA involving acetabular defects. The databases of Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, Embase, Global Health and Central were searched. Fifty‐three relevant articles met the inclusion criteria, and their quality were evaluated using a modified Downs and Black evaluation criteria framework. Manual image segmentation from computed tomography scans, which is time consuming, remains the primary method used to generate 3D models of hip bone; however, statistical shape models, once developed, can be used to estimate pre‐defect anatomy rapidly. Finite element modeling, which has been used to estimate bone stresses and strains, and implant micromotion postoperatively, has played a key role in custom and off‐the‐shelf implant design, mitigation of stress shielding, and prediction of bone remodeling and implant stability. However, model validation is challenging and requires rigorous evaluation and comparison with respect to mid‐ to long‐term clinical outcomes. Development of fast, accurate methods to model acetabular defects, including statistical shape models and artificial neural networks, may ultimately improve uptake of and expand applications in modeling and simulation of rTHA for the research setting and clinic.

show abstract

Acetabular Revision Arthroplasty Based on 3-Dimensional Reconstruction Technology Using Jumbo Cups

Cited by 7 publications

References 49 publications

Comparison between two- and three-dimensional methods for offset measurements after total hip arthroplasty

Comparison between two- and three-dimensional methods for offset measurements after total hip arthroplasty

Personalized digital simulation‑assisted acetabular component implantation in revision hip arthroplasty

Computational modeling of revision total hip arthroplasty involving acetabular defects: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About