Effect of improved navigation performance on the accuracy of implant placement in total hip arthroplasty with a CT-based navigation system

  • Ichiro Nakahara
  • Takayuki Kyo
  • Yasuo Kuroda
  • Hidenobu Miki
Original Article Bone / Joint
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

A computed tomography (CT)-based navigation system is one of the support tools to place implant with appropriate alignment and position in total hip arthroplasty (THA). To determine whether the higher performance of the navigation would further improve the accuracy of implant placement in the clinical setting, we retrospectively compared the navigation accuracy of two different versions of a navigation system. The newer version of the navigation system had an upgraded optical sensor with superior positional accuracy. Navigation accuracy, defined as differences between postoperative measurements on CT images and intraoperative records on the navigation system, of 49 THAs performed with the newer version of the navigation system was compared with that of 49 THAs performed with the older version. With the newer version, the mean absolute accuracy (95% limits of agreement) of implant alignment was 1.2° (± 3.3°) for cup inclination, 1.0° (± 2.4°) for cup anteversion, 2.0° (± 4.9°) for stem anteversion, and 1.1° (± 2.4°) for stem valgus angle. The accuracy of the implant position was 1.5 mm (± 3.1 mm), 1.3 mm (± 3.0 mm), and 1.5 mm (± 3.1 mm) for cup x-, y-, and z-axes, respectively, 1.6 mm (± 3.2 mm), 1.4 mm (± 2.9 mm), and 1.5 mm (± 2.7 mm) for stem x-, y-, and z-axes, respectively, and 2.4 mm (± 4.5 mm) for leg length discrepancy. The values for the newer version were significantly more accurate with less variation compared to those of the older version. With upgraded navigation performance, more accurate implant placement was demonstrated in the clinical setting.

Keywords

Total hip arthroplasty CT-based navigation Implant alignment Implant position Accuracy 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Wan Z, Boutary M, Dorr LD. The influence of acetabular component position on wear in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:51–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tower SS. Rim cracking of the cross-linked longevity polyethylene acetabular liner after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg. 2007;89:2212–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barrack RL. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: implant design and orientation. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2003;11:89–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bader R, Steinhauser E, Zimmermann S, Mittelmeier W, Scholz R, Busch R. Differences between the wear couples metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-ceramic in the stability against dislocation of total hip replacement. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2004;15:711–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen PY, Wu CT, Hou CH, Hou SM. Loosening of total hip arthroplasty with a prosthesis employing a skirted femoral head. J Formos Med Assoc. 2005;104:370–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shon WY, Baldini T, Peterson MG, Wright TM, Salvati EA. Impingement in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:427–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parvizi J, Sharkey PF, Bissett GA, Rothman RH, Hozack WJ. Surgical treatment of limb-length discrepancy following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:2310–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sugano N, Sasama T, Sato Y, Nakajima Y, Nishii T, Yonenobu K, Tamura S, Ochi T. Accuracy evaluation of surface-based registration methods in a computer navigation system for hip surgery performed through a posterolateral approach. Comput Aided Surg. 2001;6:195–203.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li Q, Zamorano L, Jiang Z, Gong JX, Pandya A, Perez R, Diaz F. Effect of optical digitizer selection on the application accuracy of a surgical localization system?a quantitative comparison between the OPTOTRAK and flashpoint tracking systems. Comput Aided Surg. 1999;4:314–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schmerber S, Chassat MSF. Accuracy evaluation of a CAS system: laboratory protocol and results with 6D localizers, and clinical experiences in otorhinolaryngology. Comput Aided Surg. 2001;6:1–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sugano N, Tsuda K, Miki H, Takao M, Suzuki N, Nakamura N. Dynamic measurements of hip movement in deep bending activities after total hip arthroplasty using a 4-dimensional motion analysis system. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:1562–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Munch B, Ruegsegger P. 3-D repositioning and differential images of volumetric CT measurements. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1993;12:509 – 14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Holden M, Hill DL, Denton ER, Jarosz JM, Cox TC, Rohlfing T, Goodey J, Hawkes DJ. Voxel similarity measures for 3-D serial MR brain image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2000;19:94–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Watanabe Y, Masumoto J, Sasama T, Sato Y, Sugano N, Nishii T, Miki H, Yoshikawa H, Ochi T, Tamura S. Preprocessing method for rigid registration between pre- and postoperative CT images in total hip replacement. Med Imag Tech. 2003;21:358 – 68.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murray DW. The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75:228 – 32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iwana D, Nakamura N, Miki H, Kitada M, Hananouchi T, Sugano N. Accuracy of angle and position of the cup using computed tomography-based navigation systems in total hip arthroplasty. Comput Aided Surg. 2013;18:187–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ybinger T, Kumpan W, Hoffart HE, Muschalik B, Bullmann W, Zweymüller K. Accuracy of navigation-assisted acetabular component positioning studied by computed tomography measurements: methods and results. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:812–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Parratte S, Argenson JN. Validation and usefulness of a computer-assisted cup-positioning system in total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized, controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:494–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ryan JA, Jamali AA, Bargar WL. Accuracy of computer navigation for acetabular component placement in THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:169 – 77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jenny JY, Boeri C, Dosch JC, Uscatu M, Ciobanu E. Navigated non-image-based positioning of the acetabulum during total hip replacement. Int Orthop. 2009;33:83 – 7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fukunishi S, Nishio S, Fujihara Y, Okahisa S, Takeda Y, Fukui T, Yoshiya S. Accuracy of combined anteversion in image-free navigated total hip arthroplasty: stem-first or cup-first technique? Int Orthop. 2016;40:9–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Takeda Y, Fukunishi S, Nishio S, Fujihara Y, Yoshiya S. Accuracy of component orientation and leg length adjustment in total hip arthroplasty using image-free navigation. Open Orthop J. 2017;11:1432–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lin F, Lim D, Wixson RL, Milos S, Hendrix RW, Makhsous M. Limitations of imageless computer-assisted navigation for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:596–605.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sendtner E, Schuster T, Wörner M, Kalteis T, Grifka J, Renkawitz T. Accuracy of acetabular cup placement in computer-assisted, minimally-invasive THR in a lateral decubitus position. Int Orthop. 2011;35:809 – 15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kalteis T, Handel M, Bäthis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Grifka J. Imageless navigation for insertion of the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty: is it as accurate as CT-based navigation? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:163–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hananouchi T, Takao M, Nishii T, Miki H, Iwana D, Yoshikawa H, Sugano N. Comparison of navigation accuracy in THA between the mini-anterior and -posterior approaches. Int J Med Robot. 2009;5:20–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hirasawa N, Matsubara M, Ishii K, Hagio S, Okuda N, Sekiya I, Muneta T. Effect of CT slice thickness on accuracy of implant positioning in navigated total hip arthroplasty. Comput Aided Surg. 2010;15:83–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kitada M, Nakamura N, Iwana D, Kakimoto A, Nishii T, Sugano N. Evaluation of the accuracy of computed tomography—based navigation for femoral stem orientation and leg length discrepancy. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:674–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kajino Y, Kabata T, Maeda T, Iwai S, Kuroda K, Tsuchiya H. Does degree of the pelvic deformity affect the accuracy of computed tomography-based hip navigation? J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:1651–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kyo T, Nakahara I, Kuroda Y, Miki H. Effects of coordinate-system construction methods on postoperative computed tomography evaluation of implant orientation after total hip arthroplasty. Comput Aided Surg. 2015;20:52–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kummer FJ, Shah S, Iyer S, DiCesare PE. The effect of acetabular cup orientations on limiting hip rotation. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14:509–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Widmer KH, Zurfluh B. Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion. J Orthop Res. 2004;22:815–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sugano N, Takao M, Sakai T, Nishii T, Miki H. Does CT-based navigation improve the long-term survival in ceramic-on-ceramic THA? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:3054–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu RY, Wang KZ, Wang CS, Dang XQ, Tong ZQ. Evaluation of medial acetabular wall bone stock in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip using a helical computed tomography multiplanar reconstruction technique. Acta Radiol. 2009;50:791–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Austin MS, Hozack WJ, Sharkey PF, Rothman RH. Stability and leg length equality in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:88–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    O’Brien S, Kernohan G, Fitzpatrick C, Hill J, Beverland D. Perception of imposed leg length inequality in normal subjects. Hip Int. 2010;20:505–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Society for Artificial Organs 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ichiro Nakahara
    • 1
  • Takayuki Kyo
    • 2
  • Yasuo Kuroda
    • 1
  • Hidenobu Miki
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryOsaka National HospitalOsakaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryBellland General HospitalSakai-cityJapan

Personalised recommendations