Quantitative assessment of acetabular bone defects: A study of 50 computed tomography data sets.

Acetabular bone defect quantification and classification is still challenging. The objectives of this study were to suggest and define parameters for the quantification of acetabular bone defects, to analyze 50 bone defects and to present the results and correlations between the defined parameters. The analysis was based on CT-data of pelvises with acetabular bone defects and their reconstruction via a statistical shape model. Based on this data, bone volume loss and new bone formation were analyzed in four sectors (cranial roof, anterior column, posterior column, and medial wall). In addition, ovality of the acetabulum, lateral center-edge angle, implant migration, and presence of wall defects were analyzed and correlations between the different parameters were assessed. Bone volume loss was found in all sectors and was multidirectional in most cases. Highest relative bone volume loss was found in the medial wall with median and [25, 75]-percentile values of 72.8 [50.6, 95.0] %. Ovality, given as the length to width ratio of the acetabulum, was 1.3 [1.1, 1.4] with a maximum of 2.0, which indicated an oval shape of the defect acetabulum. Lateral center-edge angle was 30.4° [21.5°, 40.4°], which indicated a wide range of roof coverage in the defect acetabulum. Total implant migration was 25.3 [14.8, 32.7] mm, whereby cranial was the most common direction. 49/50 cases showed a wall defect in at least one sector. It was observed that implant migration in cranial direction was associated with relative bone volume loss in cranial roof (R = 0.74) and ovality (R = 0.67). Within this study, 50 pelvises with acetabular bone defects were successfully analyzed using six parameters. This could provide the basis for a novel classification concept which would represent a quantitative, objective, unambiguous, and reproducible classification approach for acetabular bone defects.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

We have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Three of the authors (RS, GH, TG) are employees of B.Braun Aesculap AG Tuttlingen, a manufacturer of orthopedic implants. Four of the authors (HG, VJ, MR, FT) are advising surgeons in Aesculap R&D projects and three authors (VJ, MR, PW) are getting institutional support. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.