Intraoperative navigation in hip surface arthroplasty: a radiographic comparative analysis study
- 108 Downloads
The goal of the current prospective randomised radiological study was to determine the accuracy of conventional and computer-assisted femoral component implantation in surface arthroplasty (SRA).
We analysed on standard radiographs the femoral component positions after 30 conventional instrumented (Group 1) and 30 navigated (Group 2) SRA femoral components. We evaluated: varus or valgus orientation, horizontal femoral offset and translation of the component.
The tendency to implant the femoral component in mild valgus position (2.8° in Group 1 compared to 2.1° in Group 2), more distally and ventrally in the femoral neck (in Group 1) and with femoral off-set increase (4.8 mm in Group 1 compared to 3.4 mm in Group 2) was found.
The navigation system enables a more accurate insertion of the femoral component.
KeywordsSurface arthroplasty Computer navigation
- 1.Amstutz HC, Campbell PA, Duff ML (2004) Fracture of the neck of the femur after surface arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg 86A:1874–1877Google Scholar
- 2.Vendittoli PA, Lavigne M, Winzenrieth R, Plamondon D, Nuno N (2006) Factors affecting hip range of motion in surface replacement arthroplasty. Hip Int 16(Suppl):106Google Scholar
- 3.Itayem R, Arndt A, Nistor L, McMinn D, Lundberg A (2005) Stability of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty at two years. A radiostereophotogrammetric analysis study. J Bone Joint Surg 87B:158–162Google Scholar
- 5.Daniel J, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJW (2003) Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg 86B:177–184Google Scholar
- 6.Alberton GM, High WA, Morrey BF (2002) Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg 84A:1788–1792Google Scholar
- 8.Silva M, Lee KH, Heisel Ch, delaRosa MA, Schmalzried TP (2004) The biomechanical results of total hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 86A:40–46Google Scholar
- 13.D´Lima DD, Chen PC, Colwell CW Jr (2001) Optimizing acetabular component position to minimize impingement and reduce contact stress. J Bone Joint Surg 83A:87–91Google Scholar
- 14.Berry DJ (1999) Dislocation. In: Steinberg ME, Garino JP (eds) Revision total hip arthroplasty. Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 463–481Google Scholar
- 15.Beaulé PE, Lee JL, LeDuff MJ, Amstutz HC, Ebramzadeh E (2004) Orientation of the femoral component in surface arthroplasty of the hip. A biomechanical and clinical analysis. J Bone Joint Surg 86A:2015–2021Google Scholar