Wang Dong, Zhang Huawu, Sun Shui, Zhou Yonggang, Chen Jiying, Hao Libo
Acta Orthop Belg. 2018 Dec;84(4):430-435.
This study aimed to compare the accuracy of pelvic height planning vs. the conventional templating method for acetabulum cup measurement. A total of 200 consecutive patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) were randomly grouped as follows: group A, accepting conventional templating; group B, accepting pelvic height planning. Preoperative measurement of the acetabular cup was performed with conventional templating and pelvic height planning, respectively. There were 57 cases with the same size or with one type size discrepancy, 49 with two type size discrepancies, and 14 with three type size discrepancies in group A. There were 145 cases with the same size or one type size discrepancy, 20 with two type size discrepancies, and 3 type size discrepancies in group B. The mean difference between the planned size and actual cup size was 2.58 ± 0.89 mm (group A) vs. 1.38 ± 1.22 mm (group B). Therefore, pelvic height planning is reliable for use in preoperative planning compared with conventional templating.
本研究旨在比较髋臼杯测量中骨盆高度规划与传统模板测量方法的准确性。共有200例连续接受初次全髋关节置换术（THA）的患者被随机分组如下：A组，接受传统模板测量；B组，接受骨盆高度规划。术前分别采用传统模板测量和骨盆高度规划对髋臼杯进行测量。A组中有57例尺寸相同或相差一个型号，49例相差两个型号，14例相差三个型号。B组中有145例尺寸相同或相差一个型号，20例相差两个型号，3例相差三个型号。计划尺寸与实际髋臼杯尺寸的平均差值在A组为2.58±0.89毫米，在B组为1.38±1.22毫米。因此，与传统模板测量相比，骨盆高度规划在术前规划中使用是可靠的。
