header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

RADIOGRAPHIC COMPARISON OF TWO DIFFERENT ANKLE REGISTRATION TECHNIQUES

The International Society for Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery (CAOS)



Abstract

Accurate and reliable registration of the ankle center is a necessary requirement in computer-assisted TKR. There is debate among surgeons over which registration procedure more accurately reflects the true center of the ankle joint. The aim of this study was to compare two different ankle registration landmarks on radiographs and determine how much they differed from the anatomic center of the talus in the frontal plane. Specifically, we asked what the average deviation in tibial mechanical axis registration would be when registering the ankle center using: A) the extreme medial and lateral points; and B) the most distal points, of the respective malleoli. A second question was whether or not BMI had any significant effect on mechanical axis registration error.

We reviewed the preoperative hip-to-ankle radiographs of 40 patients who underwent navigated TKR at our institution. The patient cohort was composed of 32 females and 7 males, with a mean age of 69 years (range, 45–84 years) and a mean BMI of 29.9 (range, 14.7–43.3). All radiographs were stored in and reviewed using PACS.

No clinically significant divergence from the anatomic center of the ankle was seen when using the Extremes Midpoint technique (mean divergence = 0.2® lateral; SD = 0.5®; 95% CI = −0.3®, −0.1®) or the Distal Midpoint technique (mean divergence = 0.2® lateral; SD = 0.6®; 95% CI = −0.39®, 0®). The mean difference between both techniques was 0.02® (SD = 0.3®; 95% CI = −0.1®, 0.1®; P = 0.68). BMI had no significant effect on the divergence from the true ankle center for either the Extremes Midpoint (R2 = 0.002; P = 0.78) or the Distal Midpoint techniques (R2 = 0.004; P = 0.90).(Figure 2)

The center of the ankle, as determined by using the Extremes Midpoint technique, lied 1.1 mm (SD = 2.6 mm; 95% CI = −1.9 mm to −0.3 mm) from the anatomic axis of the tibia. When determined using the Distal Midpoint technique, the center of the ankle lied 1.7 mm (SD = 2.3 mm; 95% CI = −2.5 mm to −0.98 mm) from the anatomic axis. Although statistically significant (P = 0.028), this difference was not clinically relevant (<3 mm). BMI had no significant effect on these differences (R2 = 0.07; P = 0.11; R2 = 0.02, P = 0.38).(Figure 3)

There is no significant difference between ankle registration using the Extremes Midpoint or the Distal Midpoint techniques and the anatomic center of the ankle. Patients' BMI does not seem to affect the registration of the ankle center with either technique.