2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2008.11.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of a Computed Tomography–Based Navigation System Prototype for Hip Arthroscopy in the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Cam Impingement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
57
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
1
57
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Brunner et al [13] have already evaluated a CT-based navigation protocol for improving the accuracy of arthroscopic osteochondroplasty in impingement patients. Although the navigational system itself is highly accurate, the authors concluded that it does not improve the rate of insufficient alpha angle corrections after hip arthroscopy (24%).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Brunner et al [13] have already evaluated a CT-based navigation protocol for improving the accuracy of arthroscopic osteochondroplasty in impingement patients. Although the navigational system itself is highly accurate, the authors concluded that it does not improve the rate of insufficient alpha angle corrections after hip arthroscopy (24%).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of these, five reported outcomes for both CAM and Pincer radiographic outcomes in the same study [20,25,26,29,31]. Three studies included magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of their postoperative imaging protocol [22,26,31], while three other studies utilized computed tomography (CT) scan as part of their postoperative imaging protocol [27,29,32]. Table 2 shows radiographic outcomes for the included studies.…”
Section: Radiographic Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various radiographic indices calculated on plain X-rays [standing AP pelvis, elongated-neck lateral view (Dunn lateral radiograph), and false profile], such as Tonnis OA grade, coronal CE angle, Tonnis angle, and variables derived from the three-dimensional CT scan (alpha-angle, beta-angle, McKibbon indices, acetabular version, coronal and sagittal CE angle, neck-shaft angle, and femoral version), which better delineates the bone anatomy, can facilitate the mechanical diagnosis, and specifically whether there is a structurally normal, undercovered, or overcovered hip (Figs. 1, 8, and 9) Computer navigation surgical planning software can be used to confirm and model osseous impingements [12,36]. These resultant mechanical stresses lead to reactive hip pain related to insufficient congruency or impingement between the head and socket, leading to asymmetric wear of the chondral surfaces of the acetabulum and femoral head with or without associated instability of the hip.…”
Section: Layered Approach To Mechanical Hip Painmentioning
confidence: 99%