Skip to main content
Log in

Validity and reliability of preoperative templating in total hip arthroplasty using a digital templating system

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the validity, interobserver reliability, and intraobserver reproducibility of a digital templating system, the Mdesk™ in preoperative templating in cemented and reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Materials and methods

Validity was evaluated by comparing the planned cup size, stem size, CCD angles, and neck length with the components used in 129 patients operated with cemented and reverse hybrid THA. The reliability was measured by comparing the templating results of two surgeons with each other (interobserver) and the results of two templatings carried out by first surgeon (intraobserver). The leg length discrepancy was measured before and after the operation to assess the templating ability to correct it.

Results

The Mdesk™ system showed good validity (kappa value ranged from 0.64 to 0.96), especially when one size over and under the planned size were included. No difference between cemented and cementless stems was found. The interobserver reliability ranged from fair (kappa 0.23) to substantial (kappa 0.61) while the intraobserver reproducibility ranged from substantial (kappa 0.70) to excellent (kappa 0.82). Templating and intraoperative measures succeeded to restore the leg length.

Conclusions

The Mdesk™ system has comparable validity and reliability with other templating systems used in clinical practice. We recommend that the same surgeon who does the preoperative radiographic templating to also perform the operation. Further studies are required to evaluate the results of succeeded templating in the long run.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Eggli S, Pisan M, Muller ME. The value of preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1998;80-B:382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Blackley HR, Howell GE, Rorabeck CH. Planning and management of the difficult primary hip replacement: preoperative planning and technical considerations. Instr Course Lect. 2000;49:3–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bono JB. Digital templating in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 2004;86:118.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Della Valle AG, Padgett DE, Salvati EA. Preoperative planning for primary total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005;13:455.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Knight JL, Atwater RD. Preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1992;7(Suppl):403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Carter LW, Stovall DO, Young TR. Determination of accuracy of preoperative templating of noncemented femoral prostheses. J Arthroplasty. 1995;10:507–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gonzalez Della Valle A, Slullitel G, Piccaluga F, Salvati EA. The precision and usefulness of preoperative planning for cemented and hybrid primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:51–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Suh KT, Cheon SJ, Kim DW. Comparison of preoperative templating with postoperative assessment in cementless total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand. 2004;75:40–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Davila JA, Kransdorf MJ, Duffy GP. Surgical planning of total hip arthroplasty: accuracy of computer-assisted EndoMap software in predicting component size. Skeletal Radiol. 2006;35:390–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Olsen M, Gamble P, Chiu M, Tumia N, Boyle Schemitsch EH. Assessment of accuracy and reliability in preoperative templating for hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25(3):445–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gamble P, de Beer J, Petruccelli D, Winemaer M. The accuracy of digital templating in uncemented total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25(4):529–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Iorio R, Siegel J, Specht LM, Tilzey JF, Hartman A, Healy WL. A comparison of acetate vs digital templating for preoperative planning of total hip arthroplasty. Is digital templating accurate and safe? J Arthroplasty. 2009;24(2):175–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Steinberg EL, Shash N, Menahem A, Dekel S. Preoperative planning of total hip replacement using the TraumaCad™ system. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010;130:1429–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhao X, Zhu ZA, Zhao J, Li MQ, Wang G, Yu DG, et al. The utility of digital templating in total hip arthroplasty with Crowe type II and III dysplastic hips. Int Orthop. 2011;35:631–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Efe T, El-Zayat BF, Heyse TJ, Timmesfeld N, Fuchs-Winkelmann S, Schmitt J. Precision of preoperative digital templating in total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg. 2011;77:616–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Horneij E, Holmström E, Hemborg B, Isberg PE, Ekdahl C. Interrater reliability and between-days repeatability of eight physical performance tests. Adv Physiother. 2002;4:146–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rheault W, Albright B, Byers C, Franta M, Johnson A, Skowronek M. Intertester reliability of the cervical range of motion device. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1992;15:147–50.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lindell O, Eriksson L, Strender L-E. The reliability of a 10-test package for patients with prolonged back and neck pain: could an examiner without formal medical education be used without loss of quality? A methodological study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007;8:31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Charnley J. Low friction arthroplasty of the hip. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 1979. p. 246.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Müller ME. Total hip replacement: planning, technique and complications. In: Surgical management of degenerative arthritis of the lower limb. Philadelphia: Lea and Faber 1975; 90–113.

  22. Crooijmans H, Laumen A, van Pul C, van Mourik J. A new digital preoperative planning method for total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(4):909–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. The B, Diercks R, van Ooijen P, Van Horn JR. Comparison of analog and digital preoperative planning in total hip and knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2005;76:78–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kosashvili Y, Shasha N, Olschewski E, Safir O, White L, Gross A, et al. Digital versus conventional templating techniques in preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. Can J Surg. 2009;52(1):6–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Della Valle GA, Comba F, Taveras N, Salvati EA. The utility and precision of analogue and digital preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2008;32:289–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arkan S. Sayed-Noor.

Additional information

No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bertz, A., Indrekvam, K., Ahmed, M. et al. Validity and reliability of preoperative templating in total hip arthroplasty using a digital templating system. Skeletal Radiol 41, 1245–1249 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-012-1431-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-012-1431-4

Keywords

Navigation