Influence of calibration on digital templating of hip arthroplasty.
Acetabulum
/ diagnostic imaging
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip
/ methods
Calibration
Female
Femur Head
/ diagnostic imaging
Hip Joint
/ diagnostic imaging
Hip Prosthesis
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Preoperative Care
Radiographic Magnification
/ methods
Random Allocation
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Calibration
Digital templating
Radiography
Total hip arthroplasty
Journal
International orthopaedics
ISSN: 1432-5195
Titre abrégé: Int Orthop
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7705431
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2019
08 2019
Historique:
received:
30
04
2018
accepted:
15
08
2018
pubmed:
23
8
2018
medline:
7
3
2020
entrez:
23
8
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Digital templating for total joint replacement is the current standard. For image calibration, external calibration markers (ECM) are used. However, there are concerns regarding the precision of the method. This study aimed to identify the direct influence of calibration errors on digital templating. A retrospective analysis of 100 post-operative radiographs with unilateral total hip arthroplasty was performed. The magnification factor of the ECM and of the internal prosthetic femoral head (ICM) as a reference value was calculated for each radiograph. Two blinded observers performed templating of the contralateral hip using a randomized list for all radiographs and both markers. The component size templated by the ECM magnification was compared to the reference by the ICM magnification. Mean magnification factors of ICM and ECM differed significantly (p = 0.006). The absolute difference was 5.2% (range 0.0-23.3%, SD 4.8%). Templating of the acetabular or the femoral component showed no significant differences (p = 0.120, p = 0.599). Differences of more than one size were found in 26% of the acetabular components and 14% of the femoral components and differences over two sizes in 10% respectively 3%. Correlation coefficients for magnification error and size differences of acetabular components were - 0.645 (p < 0.001) and for the femoral component - 0.607 (p < 0.001). The calibration error of external calibration markers in digital templating for hip replacement influences component sizes significantly. Thus, correct positioning of ECM is of utmost importance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30132182
doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4120-7
pii: 10.1007/s00264-018-4120-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1799-1805Références
Int Orthop. 2018 May;42(5):1021-1028
pubmed: 28990125
J Arthroplasty. 2016 Apr;31(4):883-7
pubmed: 26614749
J Arthroplasty. 2009 Apr;24(3):407-13
pubmed: 18534424
J Arthroplasty. 2014 Aug;29(8):1658-60
pubmed: 24736293
Acta Orthop. 2005 Feb;76(1):78-84
pubmed: 15788312
J Arthroplasty. 2017 Oct;32(10):3061-3064
pubmed: 28602530
Int Orthop. 2019 Mar;43(3):589-595
pubmed: 29922839
J Arthroplasty. 2013 Feb;28(2):331-7
pubmed: 22854351
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 13;10(7):e0128529
pubmed: 26168410
Acta Orthop Belg. 2011 Oct;77(5):616-21
pubmed: 22187836
Hip Int. 2012 Jan-Feb;22(1):82-9
pubmed: 22344481
J Arthroplasty. 2009 Feb;24(2):175-9
pubmed: 18534425
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010 Jan;92(1):136-41
pubmed: 20044692
Int Orthop. 2014 Apr;38(4):733-9
pubmed: 24162155
Int Orthop. 2017 Apr;41(4):831-836
pubmed: 27271723
J Arthroplasty. 2010 Jun;25(4):529-32
pubmed: 19493647
Crit Care. 2002 Aug;6(4):335-41
pubmed: 12225610