Combined Anteversion Technique for Total Hip Arthroplasty

AbstractCombined cup and stem anteversion in THA based on femoral anteversion has been suggested as a method to compensate for abnormal femoral anteversion. We investigated the combined anteversion technique using computer navigation. In 47 THAs, the surgeon first estimated the femoral broach anteversion and validated the position by computer navigation. The broach was then measured with navigation. The navigation screen was blocked while the surgeon estimated the anteversion of the broach. This provided two estimates of stem anteversion. The navigated stem anteversion was validated by postoperative CT scans. All cups were implanted using navigation alone. We determined precision (the reproducibility) and bias (how close the average test number is to the true value) of the stem position. Comparing the surgeon estimate to navigation anteversion, the precision of the surgeon was 16.8° and bias was 0.2°; comparing the navigation of the stem to postoperative CT anteversion, the precision was 4.8° and bias was 0.2°, meaning navigation is accurate. Combined anteversion by postoperative CT scan was 37.6° ± 7° (standard deviation) (range, 19°–50°). The combined anteversion with computer navigation was within the safe zone of 25° to 50° for 45 of 47 (96%) hips. Femoral stem anteversion had a wide variability. Level of Evidence: Level II, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[1]  A. Sudo,et al.  Computed tomographic evaluation of component position on dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. , 2006, Orthopedics.

[2]  A. Wines,et al.  Computed tomography measurement of the accuracy of component version in total hip arthroplasty. , 2006, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  Shantanu Patil,et al.  Polyethylene Wear and Acetabular Component Orientation , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[4]  A. Cotten,et al.  Causes of dislocation of total hip arthroplasty. CT study of component alignment. , 1994, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[5]  S C Horii,et al.  Review of the American College of Radiology--National Electrical Manufacturers' Association standards activity. , 1992, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine.

[6]  Dean D. Newton,et al.  Development of imageless computer navigation for acetabular component position in total hip replacement. , 2005, The Iowa orthopaedic journal.

[7]  M Tingart,et al.  Imageless navigation for insertion of the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty: is it as accurate as CT-based navigation? , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[8]  L. Dorr,et al.  Operative and Patient Care Techniques for Posterior Mini-incision Total Hip Arthroplasty , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  B. Zurfluh,et al.  Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion , 2004, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[10]  Aditya Maheshwari,et al.  Impingement with total hip replacement. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[11]  M. Maynard,et al.  Modern technique of cemented total hip arthroplasty , 1991 .

[12]  L. Dorr,et al.  Total hip arthroplasty with the APR stem and cup follow-up of a previous report. , 2005, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[13]  S. Odum,et al.  Early failure in total hip arthroplasty. , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  Fumihiro Yoshimine,et al.  The safe-zones for combined cup and neck anteversions that fulfill the essential range of motion and their optimum combination in total hip replacements. , 2006, Journal of biomechanics.

[15]  R. Barrack,et al.  Virtual reality computer animation of the effect of component position and design on stability after total hip arthroplasty. , 2001, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[16]  Standard Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and Bias in ASTM Test Methods 1 , 2022 .

[17]  D. M. Hassan,et al.  Accuracy of intraoperative assessment of acetabular prosthesis placement. , 1998, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[18]  D. D’Lima,et al.  The Effect of the Orientation of the Acetabular and Femoral Components on the Range of Motion of the Hip at Different Head-Neck Ratios* , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[19]  L. Dorr,et al.  The influence of acetabular component position on wear in total hip arthroplasty. , 2008, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[20]  Aamer Malik,et al.  Precision and Bias of Imageless Computer Navigation and Surgeon Estimates for Acetabular Component Position , 2007, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

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

[22]  D. D’Lima,et al.  Optimizing Acetabular Component Position to Minimize Impingement and Reduce Contact Stress , 2001, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[23]  L. Dorr,et al.  The effect of diaphyseal biologic fixation on clinical results and fixation of the APR-II stem. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[24]  L. Dorr,et al.  Structural and cellular assessment of bone quality of proximal femur. , 1993, Bone.

[25]  A. Duquennoy,et al.  CAUSES OF DISLOCATION OF TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY , 1994 .

[26]  B. Mckibbin,et al.  Anatomical factors in the stability of the hip joint in the newborn. , 1970, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[27]  Branislav Jaramaz,et al.  Comparison of a mechanical acetabular alignment guide with computer placement of the socket. , 2002, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[28]  B Jaramaz,et al.  Image Guided Navigation System to Measure Intraoperatively Acetabular Implant Alignment , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[29]  Brigitte M Jolles,et al.  Computer-assisted Cup Placement Techniques in Total Hip Arthroplasty Improve Accuracy of Placement , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[30]  L. Dorr,et al.  Ten years of experience with porous acetabular components for revision surgery. , 1995, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[31]  Tsuyoshi Koyama,et al.  Influence of component positions on dislocation: computed tomographic evaluations in a consecutive series of total hip arthroplasty. , 2004, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[32]  W. Capello,et al.  Morphologic Features of the Acetabulum and Femur: Anteversion Angle and Implant Positioning , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[33]  W. D. Bidgood,et al.  Introduction to the ACR-NEMA DICOM standard. , 1992, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.