Clinical accuracy of a patient-specific femoral osteotomy guide in minimally-invasive posterior hip arthroplasty

Introduction: Patient specific guides can be a valuable tool in improving the precision of planned femoral neck osteotomies, especially in minimally invasive hip surgery, where bony landmarks are often inaccessible. The aim of our study was to validate the accuracy of a novel patient specific femoral osteotomy guide for THR through a minimally invasive posterior approach, the direct superior approach (DSA). Methods: As part of our routine preoperative planning 30 patients underwent low dose CT scans of their arthritic hip. 3D printed patient specific femoral neck osteotomy guides were then produced. Intraoperatively, having cleared all soft tissue from the postero-lateral neck of the enlocated hip, the guide was placed and pinned onto the posterolateral femoral neck. The osteotomy was performed using an oscillating saw and the uncemented hip components were implanted as per routine. Postoperatively, the achieved level of the osteotomy at the medial calcar was compared with the planned level of resection using a 3D/2D matching analysis (Mimics X-ray module, Materialise, Belgium). Results: A total of 30 patients undergoing uncemented Trinity acetabular and TriFit TS femoral component arthroplasty (Corin, UK) were included in our analysis. All but one of our analysed osteotomies were found to be within 3 mm from the planned height of osteotomy. In one patient the level of osteotomy deviated 5 mm below the planned level of resection. Conclusion: Preoperative planning and the use of patient specific osteotomy guides provides an accurate method of performing femoral neck osteotomies in minimally invasive hip arthroplasty using the direct superior approach. Level of evidence: IV (Case series)

[1]  H. Rubash,et al.  The pants too short, the leg too long: leg length inequality after THA. , 2007, Orthopedics.

[2]  J. Knight,et al.  Preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. Quantitating its utility and precision. , 1992, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  D. Roger,et al.  Minimally Invasive Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Transpiriformis Approach: A Preliminary Report , 2012, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  Young-Min Kwon,et al.  The effect of femoral neck osteotomy on femoral component position of a primary cementless total hip arthroplasty , 2015, International Orthopaedics.

[5]  Bernd Hamm,et al.  Computed tomography for preoperative planning in minimal-invasive total hip arthroplasty: radiation exposure and cost analysis. , 2011, European journal of radiology.

[6]  G. Bannister,et al.  The importance of leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[7]  J. Pierrepont,et al.  CLINICAL ACCURACY OF A PATIENT-SPECIFIC GUIDE FOR DELIVERING A PLANNED FEMORAL NECK OSTEOTOMY , 2016 .

[8]  B. Hamm,et al.  Low Dose Computed Tomography for 3D Planning of Total Hip Arthroplasty: Evaluation of Radiation Exposure and Image Quality , 2015, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[9]  C. Clark,et al.  Leg‐Length Discrepancy After Total Hip Arthroplasty , 2006, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[10]  J. Pierrepont,et al.  Patient-specific instrumentation improves the accuracy of acetabular component placement in total hip arthroplasty. , 2016, The bone & joint journal.

[11]  J. W. Knight,et al.  Preoperative planning for total hip arthroplastyQuantitating its utility and precision , 1992 .

[12]  T. Board,et al.  Leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty: a review of literature , 2013, Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine.

[13]  C. Rorabeck,et al.  The operation of the century: total hip replacement , 2007, The Lancet.