CT validation of intraoperative imageless navigation (Naviswiss) for component positioning accuracy in primary total hip arthroplasty in supine patient position: a prospective observational cohort study in a single-surgeon practice.
Alignment
Arthroplasty
Hip
Navigation
Journal
Arthroplasty (London, England)
ISSN: 2524-7948
Titre abrégé: Arthroplasty
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101773073
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Dec 2023
05 Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
25
07
2023
accepted:
06
10
2023
medline:
5
12
2023
pubmed:
5
12
2023
entrez:
4
12
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to report on the validity of the Naviswiss handheld image-free navigation device for accurate intraoperative measurement of THA component positioning, in comparison with the three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of computed tomography (CT) images as the gold standard. A series of patients presenting to a single-surgeon clinic with end-stage hip osteoarthritis received primary hip arthroplasty with the anterolateral muscle-sparing surgical approach in the supine position. Imageless navigation was applied during the procedure with bone-mounted trackers applied to the greater trochanter and ASIS. Patients underwent routine CT scans before and after surgery and these were analyzed by using three-dimensional reconstruction to generate cup orientation, offset and leg length changes, which were compared to the intraoperative measurements provided by the navigation system. Estimates of agreement between the intraoperative and image-derived measurements were assessed with and without correction for bias and declared cases with potential measurement issues. The mean difference between intraoperative and postoperative CT measurements was within 2° for angular measurements and 2 mm for leg length. Absolute differences for the two indices were between 5° and 4 mm. Mean bias was 1.9°-3.6° underestimation for cup orientation and up to 2 mm overestimation for leg length change, but absolute thresholds of 10° and 10 mm were not exceeded by 95% limits of agreement (LOA), especially after correction for bias. Four cases (12%) were declared intraoperatively for issues with fixation on the greater trochanter. Inclusion of these cases generated acceptable accuracy overall and their omission failed to improve between-case variability in accuracy or LOA for both offset and leg length. The accuracy of the Naviswiss system applied during primary THA in a supine position and anterolateral surgical approach falls within clinically acceptable recommendations for acetabular cup placement, femoral offset, and length. With refinements to surgical technique to adapt to the navigation hardware, the system could be further improved with regression-based bias correction. Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618000317291).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to report on the validity of the Naviswiss handheld image-free navigation device for accurate intraoperative measurement of THA component positioning, in comparison with the three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of computed tomography (CT) images as the gold standard.
METHODS
METHODS
A series of patients presenting to a single-surgeon clinic with end-stage hip osteoarthritis received primary hip arthroplasty with the anterolateral muscle-sparing surgical approach in the supine position. Imageless navigation was applied during the procedure with bone-mounted trackers applied to the greater trochanter and ASIS. Patients underwent routine CT scans before and after surgery and these were analyzed by using three-dimensional reconstruction to generate cup orientation, offset and leg length changes, which were compared to the intraoperative measurements provided by the navigation system. Estimates of agreement between the intraoperative and image-derived measurements were assessed with and without correction for bias and declared cases with potential measurement issues.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean difference between intraoperative and postoperative CT measurements was within 2° for angular measurements and 2 mm for leg length. Absolute differences for the two indices were between 5° and 4 mm. Mean bias was 1.9°-3.6° underestimation for cup orientation and up to 2 mm overestimation for leg length change, but absolute thresholds of 10° and 10 mm were not exceeded by 95% limits of agreement (LOA), especially after correction for bias. Four cases (12%) were declared intraoperatively for issues with fixation on the greater trochanter. Inclusion of these cases generated acceptable accuracy overall and their omission failed to improve between-case variability in accuracy or LOA for both offset and leg length.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The accuracy of the Naviswiss system applied during primary THA in a supine position and anterolateral surgical approach falls within clinically acceptable recommendations for acetabular cup placement, femoral offset, and length. With refinements to surgical technique to adapt to the navigation hardware, the system could be further improved with regression-based bias correction.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618000317291).
Identifiants
pubmed: 38049889
doi: 10.1186/s42836-023-00217-z
pii: 10.1186/s42836-023-00217-z
pmc: PMC10696686
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
63Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Indian J Orthop. 2021 Mar 30;55(5):1286-1294
pubmed: 33814596
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 May;143(5):2739-2745
pubmed: 35776176
Postgrad Med J. 2021 Dec 17;:
pubmed: 37068738
J Orthop Sci. 2020 Jul;25(4):612-617
pubmed: 31619323
Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60
pubmed: 10501650
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Jun 4;23(1):537
pubmed: 35658945
Cureus. 2019 Apr 16;11(4):e4478
pubmed: 31249755
Hip Int. 2013 Jan-Feb;23(1):6-14
pubmed: 23397200
J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2022 Apr 01;6(4):
pubmed: 35472191
J Arthroplasty. 2010 Sep;25(6):982-5
pubmed: 19646844
Open Orthop J. 2016 Sep 30;10:490-499
pubmed: 27843511
BMJ Open. 2020 Oct 5;10(10):e037126
pubmed: 33020091
Int Orthop. 2017 Apr;41(4):731-738
pubmed: 27277948
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2015 Jun 05;25(2):141-51
pubmed: 26110027
Skeletal Radiol. 2012 Feb;41(2):187-91
pubmed: 21491155
Gait Posture. 2016 Sep;49:196-201
pubmed: 27450670
Magn Reson Imaging. 2012 Nov;30(9):1323-41
pubmed: 22770690
PLoS Med. 2007 Oct 16;4(10):e296
pubmed: 17941714
J Arthroplasty. 2015 Dec;30(12):2208-18
pubmed: 26282499
J Orthop Traumatol. 2022 Apr 15;23(1):21
pubmed: 35426527
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Aug;36(8):2801-2807
pubmed: 33773864
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Aug;20(8):155-163
pubmed: 31222919
J Arthroplasty. 2014 Feb;29(2):377-82
pubmed: 23958234
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2018 Aug;57:121-128
pubmed: 29986274
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2010 Sep;5(5):449-54
pubmed: 20680495
Bone Joint J. 2014 Jan;96-B(1):36-42
pubmed: 24395308
Int Orthop. 2021 Dec;45(12):3129-3137
pubmed: 34347133
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2021 Feb;107(1):102742
pubmed: 33358026
EFORT Open Rev. 2017 Mar 13;1(5):205-210
pubmed: 28461949