Abstract
Preoperative planning is a crucial step for total hip arthroplasty (THA), and 2D X-ray images are commonly used. The planning aims to provide the correct implant size, restore functional biomechanical conditions and avoid early complication such as dislocation, leg length discrepancy or abductors insufficiency. Limitations of 2D planning, besides the low accuracy in sizing, concerns the inability of planning the anteversion of both acetabular and femoral component on axial plane. Also, the verification of the planning intraoperatively is wholly left to qualitative measurements and the surgeon's experience. The need for having a more accurate and functional preoperative planning has been addressed using 3D models. The MyHip Planner (MHP) (Medacta International, Castel San Pietro, Switzerland), is a preoperative planning software which through artificial intelligent algorithm converts the CT scans into a 3D model that perfectly match the patient's anatomy. Then, automatic positioning of the implants is performed following the personal settings of the surgeon which will check and validate the planning, a personalized simulation of six daily activities to detect impingement of implants and bones. The MyHip Verifier (MHV) intraoperatively verifies the execution of the planning in terms of leg length and offset using two fluoroscopic images. Also, the size and cup angles can be calculated. The purpose of the present study was to validate the accuracy of the MHP [Fig 1] and MHV [Fig 2].
The dataset consisted of 13 patients who underwent primary uncemented THA. Each patient had a preoperative CT scan, intraoperative fluoroscopy, and postoperative CT scan after the surgery. The CT protocol used was low radiation (0,2 mm slicing for the pelvis, 0,5 mm for knees and ankles). The patients have been preoperatively planned used the MPH, and the accuracy of the components size prediction has been evaluated by comparing the preoperative planned values with the surgical reports. The MVH calculated the leg length and offset in terms of the difference between the preoperative and postoperative position of the femur concerning the pelvis. The accuracy of the measurements has been evaluated using postoperative CT scans. The MPH was able to predict the implanted size in 83% of the patient for the femoral stem and 96% for the acetabular component. The accuracy of the MVH in measuring the leg length was under 2 mm (1,6 ± 0,7 mm) while the offset was 2,5±1,6 mm. The cup angles were 5±1,1deg and 2,3±1,3deg for the anteversion and inclination, respectively. The average cup anteversion was 28,3°, mean cup inclination was 42,6°; femoral offset and leg length was restored in 96,5% of patients within a range of ±3 mm concerning the preoperative position. The results demonstrated the reliability of the MPH in predicting the implant size, and the accuracy of the MVH to verify the execution of the plan intraoperatively. The two software can be used in the clinical routine to improve the clinical outcome in THA. Limitations of this study are represented mainly by the small cohort of patients involved.
For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly.
