Cargando…

Abnormal spinopelvic mobility as a risk factor for acetabular placement error in total hip arthroplasty using optical computer-assisted surgical navigation system

AIMS: Navigation devices are designed to improve a surgeon’s accuracy in positioning the acetabular and femoral components in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to both evaluate the accuracy of an optical computer-assisted surgery (CAS) navigation system and determine whethe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jang, Seong J., Vigdorchik, Jonathan M., Windsor, Eric W., Schwarzkopf, Ran, Mayman, David J., Sculco, Peter K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery 2022
Materias:
Hip
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233429/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35694779
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.36.BJO-2022-0055
Descripción
Sumario:AIMS: Navigation devices are designed to improve a surgeon’s accuracy in positioning the acetabular and femoral components in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to both evaluate the accuracy of an optical computer-assisted surgery (CAS) navigation system and determine whether preoperative spinopelvic mobility (categorized as hypermobile, normal, or stiff) increased the risk of acetabular component placement error. METHODS: A total of 356 patients undergoing primary THA were prospectively enrolled from November 2016 to March 2018. Clinically relevant error using the CAS system was defined as a difference of > 5° between CAS and 3D radiological reconstruction measurements for acetabular component inclination and anteversion. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine whether hypermobile (Δsacral slope(SS)(stand-sit) > 30°), or stiff (ΔSS(stand-sit) < 10°) spinopelvic mobility contributed to increased error rates. RESULTS: The paired absolute difference between CAS and postoperative imaging measurements was 2.3° (standard deviation (SD) 2.6°) for inclination and 3.1° (SD 4.2°) for anteversion. Using a target zone of 40° (± 10°) (inclination) and 20° (± 10°) (anteversion), postoperative standing radiographs measured 96% of acetabular components within the target zone for both inclination and anteversion. Multiple logistic regression analysis controlling for BMI and sex revealed that hypermobile spinopelvic mobility significantly increased error rates for anteversion (odds ratio (OR) 2.48, p = 0.009) and inclination (OR 2.44, p = 0.016), whereas stiff spinopelvic mobility increased error rates for anteversion (OR 1.97, p = 0.028). There were no dislocations at a minimum three-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Despite high reliability in acetabular positioning for inclination in a large patient cohort using an optical CAS system, hypermobile and stiff spinopelvic mobility significantly increased the risk of clinically relevant errors. In patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility, CAS systems should be adjusted for use to avoid acetabular component misalignment and subsequent risk for long-term dislocation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(6):475–484.