Cargando…

Accuracy of Total Hip Arthroplasty Templating Using Set Calibration Magnifications

Background Templating for total hip arthroplasty has been adopted over recent decades as a reliable and accurate method for pre-operative planning. The use of calibration markers for this process provides a recognised benefit at the expense of cost, availability and error. Many surgeons use a set ma...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schapira, Benjamin, Madanipour, Suroosh, Iranpour, Farhad, Subramanian, Padmanabhan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10011871/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36925986
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.34883
Descripción
Sumario:Background Templating for total hip arthroplasty has been adopted over recent decades as a reliable and accurate method for pre-operative planning. The use of calibration markers for this process provides a recognised benefit at the expense of cost, availability and error. Many surgeons use a set magnification of 118% to account for calibration errors when templating total hip arthroplasty. This study aims to assess the accuracy of templating with standardised magnifications and assess the effect of BMI on templating accuracy. Materials and methods A retrospective analysis was performed using a single-surgeon series of 119 consecutive total hip arthroplasties. Anteroposterior radiographs were taken pre- or post-operatively without calibration hardware. Pre-operatively, the total hip arthroplasty was templated on TraumaCad (BrainLab Inc, Westchester, IL) using either 118% or 119% calibration magnification. Post-operative magnification was calibrated using the known femoral head diameter. Templated and implanted prostheses were compared for size. Results At 118%, 61.1% of cups matched those templated with 96.3% of cups within two sizes. At 119%, 52.5% of cups used matched their templates with 100% within two sizes. There was no significant difference between 118% and 119% cup size prediction (p=0.49). A trend was noticed in increasing magnification error with increasing BMI. However, BMI had no significant effect on the accuracy of templating cup size within two cup sizes (p=0.58). Conclusion. Templating acetabular cups using a set magnification of 118% or 119% yields accurate results and provides a reliable method to template without calibration equipment. Whilst BMI can affect magnification error, this has no significant effect on the accuracy of implanted cups and stems within two sizes.