Effect of CT slice thickness on accuracy of implant positioning in navigated total hip arthroplasty

Hirasawa, Naoyuki; Matsubara, Masaaki; Ishii, Keisuke; Hagio, S; Okuda, Naoki; Sekiya, Ichiro; Muneta, Takeshi

doi:10.3109/10929088.2010.525025

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies have investigated the accuracy of measurements obtained using a goniometer or navigation systems during THA [12][13][14][15][16] (Table 4). They reported that the mean absolute measurement accuracy ranged from 4.5°-7.3°.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies have reported the optimal positions for the acetabular components, and the accuracy of acetabular component positioning using free-hand techniques, mechanically guided techniques, or navigation systems have also been investigated [8][9][10][11]. Other studies have examined the accuracy of intraoperative measurements of stem anteversion obtained using a goniometer or navigation systems during THA [12][13][14][15][16]. However, only one CTbased navigation study has reported the accuracy of stem positioning during THA [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A simple angle-measuring instrument for measuring cemented stem anteversion during total hip arthroplasty

Mitsutake

Tanino

Nishida

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: During total hip arthroplasty (THA), the accurate placement of the femoral components is an important determinant of the success of the procedure. This study assessed the accuracy of cemented stem placement using a new angle-measuring instrument. The primary objective was to investigate the accuracy of the intraoperative measurements of cemented stem anteversion obtained using the angle-measuring instrument. Our secondary objective was to evaluate the accuracy of stem positioning performed using the angle-measuring instrument. Methods: We compared the intraoperative stem anteversion measurements obtained using the angle-measuring instrument with postoperative stem anteversion measurements obtained using computed tomography in 149 hips (measurement accuracy). We also compared the target angle and postoperative stem anteversion in 105 hips (implantation accuracy). Results: The mean amount of intraoperative stem anteversion was 37.9°± 10.1°, and the mean amount of postoperative stem anteversion was 37.0°± 10.4°. The mean measurement accuracy was 0.9°± 6.1°, and the absolute measurement accuracy was 4.9°± 3.7°. The correlation coefficient for the relationship between the intraoperative and postoperative stem anteversion measurements was 0.824 (p = 0.000). The mean amount of target angle was 37.4°± 7.6°, and the mean amount of postoperative stem anteversion was 35.9°± 9.1°. The mean implantation accuracy was 1.4°± 5.6°, and the mean absolute implantation accuracy was 4.3°± 3.6°. The correlation coefficient for the relationship between the target angle and postoperative stem anteversion was 0.795 (p = 0.000). Conclusions: The angle-measuring instrument measured intraoperative stem anteversion accurately, and cemented stem was implanted accurately during THA with the angle-measuring instrument.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A simple angle-measuring instrument for measuring cemented stem anteversion during total hip arthroplasty

Mitsutake

Tanino

Nishida

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although a few reports described clinical accuracy or measurement error in CT-based navigation systems with regard to both cups and stems, they commonly showed that results for stems were not better than those for cups. [18,29] Kitada et al [18] evaluated anatomic orientation of cup and stem anteversion in THA with a CT-based navigation system, just as we did. They reported that the navigation system produced a measurement error of 0.4 ± 2.5 (range, À6 to 5 ) for cup inclination, À0.8 ± 4.1 (range, À6 to 8 ) for cup anteversion, and -0.6 ± 4.8 (range, -11 to 10 ) for stem anteversion, which is noteworthy because cup inclination and anteversion in anatomic notation are larger than those in radiographic notation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, another group of investigators revealed that the clinical accuracy of stem anteversion was worse than that of cup anteversion in THA with same navigation system. [29] They investigated the influence of the thickness of CT slices, but they found no effect on stem anteversion when slices were between 1 and 3 mm thick.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of coordinate-system construction methods on postoperative computed tomography evaluation of implant orientation after total hip arthroplasty

Kyo

Nakahara

Kuroda

et al. 2015

Computer Aided Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: In total hip arthroplasty, it is important to assess postoperative implant orientation. The computed tomography-based (CT-based) three-dimensional (3D) templating method using 3D preoperative planning software is generally recommended. In this method, postoperative implant orientation within a bony coordinate system can be measured by overlaying a 3D computerized model of the implant on a real postoperative CT image of the implant. The bony coordinate system consists of several reference points (RPs) marked on a CT image of the bone surface. Therefore, preoperative and postoperative coordinate systems do not always match. We investigated how the difference between coordinate systems constructed from RPs chosen by manual methods (M1 and M2) and those constructed by the computer matching method influences the results of measurement validation. Methods: In M1, postoperative RPs were chosen without a specific tool in a single planning module. In M2, postoperative RPs were chosen with as little deviation as possible from preoperative RPs, verifying preoperative RPs on another monitor. Results: M1 and M2 produced mean errors in acetabular cup inclination of 0.7 ± 0.5 and 0.5 ± 0.3 , respectively, and mean errors in cup anteversion of 1.3 ± 1.2 and 0.5 ± 0.4 , respectively, which were statistically significant differences. M1 and M2 produced mean errors in femoral stem anteversion of 2.4 ± 2.0 and 2.7 ± 2.1 , respectively, not a significant difference, but these errors were larger than errors in cup orientation. Discussion: We recommend referring to preoperative RPs when choosing postoperative RPs. Surgeons must be aware that for evaluation of postoperative stem anteversion, manual methods may produce considerable error. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…3 mechanically guided techniques, or navigation systems have also been investigated [8][9][10][11]. Other studies have examined the accuracy of intraoperative measurements of stem anteversion obtained using a goniometer or navigation systems during THA [12][13][14][15][16]. However, only one CT-based navigation study has reported the accuracy of stem positioning during THA [17].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Simple Angle-Measuring Instrument for Measuring Cemented Stem Anteversion during Total Hip Arthroplasty

Mitsutake

Tanino

Nishida

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background During total hip arthroplasty (THA), the accurate placement of the femoral components is an important determinant of the success of the procedure. This study assessed the accuracy of cemented stem placement using a new angle-measuring instrument. The primary objective was to investigate the accuracy of the intraoperative measurements of cemented stem anteversion obtained using the angle-measuring instrument. Our secondary objective was to evaluate the accuracy of stem positioning performed using the angle-measuring instrument. Methods We compared the intraoperative stem anteversion measurements obtained using the angle-measuring instrument with postoperative stem anteversion measurements obtained using computed tomography in 149 hips (measurement accuracy). We also compared the target angle and postoperative stem anteversion in 105 hips (implantation accuracy). Results The mean amount of intraoperative stem anteversion was 37.9°±10.1°, and the mean amount of postoperative stem anteversion was 37.0°±10.4°. The mean measurement accuracy was 0.9°±6.1°, and the absolute measurement accuracy was 4.9°±3.7°. The correlation coefficient for the relationship between the intraoperative and postoperative stem anteversion measurements was 0.824 (p=0.000). The mean amount of target angle was 37.4°±7.6°, and the mean amount of postoperative stem anteversion was 35.9°±9.1°. The mean implantation accuracy was 1.4°±5.6°, and the mean absolute implantation accuracy was 4.3°±3.6°. The correlation coefficient for the relationship between the target angle and postoperative stem anteversion was 0.795 (p=0.000). Conclusions The angle-measuring instrument measured intraoperative stem anteversion accurately, and cemented stem was implanted accurately during THA with the angle-measuring instrument.

show abstract

Effect of CT slice thickness on accuracy of implant positioning in navigated total hip arthroplasty

Cited by 11 publications

References 14 publications

A simple angle-measuring instrument for measuring cemented stem anteversion during total hip arthroplasty

A simple angle-measuring instrument for measuring cemented stem anteversion during total hip arthroplasty

Effects of coordinate-system construction methods on postoperative computed tomography evaluation of implant orientation after total hip arthroplasty

A Simple Angle-Measuring Instrument for Measuring Cemented Stem Anteversion during Total Hip Arthroplasty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About