Surgeons' Accuracy in Achieving Their Desired Acetabular Component Orientation.

BACKGROUND Wide variability in cup orientation has been reported. The aims of this study were to determine how accurate surgeons are at orientating the acetabular component and whether factors such as visual cues and the side of operating table improved accuracy. METHODS A pelvic model was positioned in neutral alignment on an operating table and was prepared as in a posterior approach. Twenty-one surgeons (9 trainers and 12 trainees) were tasked with positioning an acetabular component in a series of target orientations. The orientation of the component was measured using stereophotogrammetry, and the difference between the achieved orientation and the target orientation was calculated. Tasks included stating the surgeon's preferred orientation and thereafter placing the cup in that orientation, reproducing visual cues (transverse acetabular ligament and alignment guide), altering orientation by 10°, and estimating orientation while on the assistant's side. RESULTS The preferred inclination was 42° and the preferred anteversion was 21°. On average, surgeons decreased the inclination by 4° and increased the anteversion by 11° when tasked with replicating their desired orientation. The variability (defined as 2 standard deviations) in achieving a target orientation was 14°. The use of visual cues, such as the transverse acetabular ligament or the alignment guide, significantly improved accuracy to 1° for anteversion (p < 0.001) and -3° for inclination (p = 0.003). In addition, the use of an alignment guide reduced the variability by one-third. Trainees and trainers had similar accuracy and variability. There was greater variability in assessing cup inclination when standing on the assistant's side compared with the surgeon's side of the table, which has implications for training. CONCLUSIONS Surgeons overestimate operative inclination and underestimate anteversion, which is of benefit, as this, on average, helps to achieve the desired radiographic cup orientation. Although the use of visual cues helps, conventional techniques result in a large variability in acetabular component orientation. New and better guides and methods for training need to be developed.

[1]  H. Gill,et al.  The effect of orientation of the acetabular component on outcome following total hip arthroplasty with small diameter hard-on-soft bearings. , 2015, The bone & joint journal.

[2]  S. Weinstein,et al.  The natural history and long-term follow-up of Scheuermann kyphosis. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  Henrik Malchau,et al.  The John Charnley Award: Risk Factors for Cup Malpositioning: Quality Improvement Through a Joint Registry at a Tertiary Hospital , 2011, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  P. Beaulé,et al.  Learning from the learning curve in total hip resurfacing: a radiographic analysis , 2009, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[5]  H. Gill,et al.  The relationship between operative and radiographic acetabular component orientation: which factors influence resultant cup orientation? , 2014, The bone & joint journal.

[6]  Y. Minoda,et al.  Are acetabular component alignment guides for total hip arthroplasty accurate? , 2010, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[7]  C. Wirth,et al.  Evaluation of the learning curves associated with uncemented primary total hip arthroplasty depending on the experience of the surgeon. , 2006, Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy.

[8]  J. Lewis,et al.  Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. , 1978, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[9]  B. Boszczyk,et al.  Freehand determination of the trajectory angle for cervical lateral mass screws: how accurate is it? , 2011, European Spine Journal.

[10]  M. Krismer,et al.  Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: the effect of orientation of the acetabular component. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[11]  T. Joyce,et al.  Adverse reaction to metal debris following hip resurfacing: the influence of component type, orientation and volumetric wear. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[12]  D. Beverland,et al.  The transverse acetabular ligament: an aid to orientation of the acetabular component during primary total hip replacement: a preliminary study of 1000 cases investigating postoperative stability. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[13]  K. Tetsworth,et al.  Measurement of rotational deformity: using a smartphone application is more accurate than conventional methods , 2013, ANZ journal of surgery.

[14]  Wilfried Linder,et al.  Digital Photogrammetry: A Practical Course , 2016 .

[15]  D. Murray The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[16]  A. Dubrowski,et al.  The effect of computer navigation on trainee learning of surgical skills. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[17]  G. Gangoiti,et al.  Double-camera measurements of plumes, applied to wind field characterization and dispersion studies , 1996 .

[18]  H. Gill,et al.  Pelvic position and movement during hip replacement. , 2014, The bone & joint journal.

[19]  V. Kumar,et al.  Total hip replacement through a posterior approach using a 22 mm diameter femoral head : the role of the transverse acetabular ligament and capsular repair in reducing the rate of dislocation. , 2014, The bone & joint journal.

[20]  G. Meermans,et al.  The use of the transverse acetabular ligament for determining the orientation of the components in total hip replacement: a randomised controlled trial. , 2014, The bone & joint journal.

[21]  M. Royle,et al.  Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: the effect of cup position and component size on range of motion to impingement. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[22]  Stefan Cantré,et al.  Applications of low-budget photogrammetry in the geotechnical laboratory , 2009 .

[23]  H. Gill,et al.  Optimal acetabular orientation for hip resurfacing. , 2010, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.