Abstract
Introduction
Acetabular component orientation is an important determinant of outcome following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although surgeons aim to achieve optimal cup orientation, many studies demonstrate their inability to consistently achieve this. Factors that contribute are pelvic orientation and the surgeon's ability to correctly orient the cup at implantation. The goal of this study was to determine the accuracy with which surgeons can achieve cup orientation angles.
Methods
In this in vitro study using a calibrated left and right sawbone hemipelvis model, participants (n=10) were asked to place a cup mounted on its introducer giving different targets. Measurements of cup orientation were made using a stereophotogrammetry protocol to measure radiographic inclination and operative anteversion (OA). A digital inclinometer was used to measure the intra-operative inclination (IOI) which is the angle of the cup introducer relative to the floor. First, the participant stated his or her preferred IOI and OA and positioned the cup accordingly. Second, the participant had to position the cup parallel to the anteversion of the transverse acetabular ligament (TAL). Third, the participant had to position the cup at IOI angles of 35°, 40° and 45°. Fourth, the participant used the mechanical alignment guide (45° of IOI and 30° of OA) to orient the cup. Each task was analysed separately and subgroup analysis included left versus right side and hip surgeons versus non-hip surgeons.
Results
For the first task, hip surgeons preferred smaller IOI and larger OA than non-hip surgeons, but there was no significant difference in accuracy between both groups. When aiming for TAL, both surgeon groups performed similar, but accuracy on the non-dominant side was significantly better compared with the dominant side (mean deviation 0.6° SD 2.4 versus −2.6° SD 2.3) (p=0.004). When aiming for a specific IOI target of 35°, 40° or 45°, non-hip surgeons outperformed hip surgeons (mean deviation form target IOI 1.9° SD 2.7 versus −3.1° SD 3.8) (p<0.0001) with less variance (p=0.03). Contrary to version, accuracy on the dominant side was significantly better compared with the non-dominant side (mean deviation −0.4° SD 3.4 versus −2.1° SD 4.8). When using a mechanical guide, surgeons performed similar (0.6° SD 1.2 versus −0.4° SD 2.1 for inclination p=0.11 and −0.5° SD 2.6 versus −1.8° SD 3.3 for version p=0.22) and these values did not differ significantly from the actual IOI and OA of the mechanical guide. When using a mechanical guide, there was no difference in accuracy between the dominant and non-dominant side.
Conclusion
There was no difference in accuracy between hip surgeons and non-hip surgeons when they aimed for their preferred IOI and OA or used a mechanical guide. When aiming for a specific IOI target, non-hip surgeons outperformed hip surgeons. Hip surgeons overestimate IOI and underestimate OA, presumably because this helps to achieve the desired radiographic cup orientation. Regarding accuracy, the non-dominant side was better for version and the dominant side for inclination. When aiming for a specific IOI and OA target, using a mechanical guide is significantly better than freehand cup orientation.
