Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Int Orthop. 2021 Nov;45(11):2797-2804. doi: 10.1007/s00264-021-05165-4. Epub 2021 Aug 18.
Accurate acetabular component placement may reduce the risk of complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). While surgeon experience and volume may reduce outliers, little is known how cup positioning accuracy and consistency relates to level of training (resident, fellow, attending) and whether trainee level impacts the magnitude and direction of cup placement errors.
Ninety patients undergoing posterolateral computer-assisted navigation THA were included for analysis. All surgery was performed by two fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons and assisted by a trainee (orthopedic resident (PGY 1-5) or fellow in adult reconstruction). In order to determine accuracy of cup placement in trainees and attendings, we used computer navigation to determine freehand cup placement by the trainee, then by the attending surgeon. Final cup inclination and version were determined and recorded by computer-assisted surgical navigation. Comparison of consistency in cup inclination and anteversion was made on values obtained by residents, fellows, and attendings and final values provided by the navigation system. In addition, to assess the role of training and repetition, acetabular cup inclination and version were compared between fellows during the first half and the second half of their training year. All comparisons were performed with the Student t-test except for comparison of rate of deviation from the safe zone, which were performed with the chi-square test. The level of significance was defined as p values ≤ 0.05 with 95% confidence interval, and trend toward significance was defined as p values ≤ 0.1.
Inclination deviation from the final position and cup version deviation from the final position were statistically significant between resident vs attendings (p < 0.001 (inclination), p < 0.001 (version)), fellow vs attendings (p < 0.001 (inclination), p < 0.001 (version)), and all trainee vs attendings (p < 0.001 (inclination), p < 0.001 (version)). In all comparisons, the attending surgeons placed the cup closer to the final cup position than both resident and fellows. Proportion of inclination deviation from the safe zone of residents was significantly higher than of attendings (p < 0.001) but no significant difference was observed between fellows and attending (p = 1.00). Compared to residents, fellows demonstrated lower proportion of inclination deviation from the safe zone of 3.3% vs 23.3% for fellows vs residents (p = 0.002) and tended to implant the cups in a more horizontal position (45.6 ± 6.6° [SD] and 42.7 ± 4.3°, respectively, p = 0.04). Compared to fellow, residents tended to implant the cup in a more anteverted position than the final cup version (9.6 ± 6.7° and 6.74 ± 5.6° [SD], p = 0.034). There was no statistically significant difference in cup position between attendings' free-hand and final (computer assisted) cup placement.
Accurate and consistent acetabular cup placement improves with level of training. Accurate and consistent acetabular cup version is harder to master as compared to acetabular cup inclination.
准确的髋臼组件位置放置可以降低全髋关节置换术后(THA)并发症的风险。尽管外科医生的经验和手术量可能会减少异常值,但我们对于杯定位精度和一致性与培训水平(住院医师、研究员、主治医生)之间的关系以及培训水平是否会影响杯放置误差的幅度和方向知之甚少。
纳入 90 例接受后外侧计算机辅助导航 THA 的患者进行分析。所有手术均由两名接受过 fellowship 培训的骨科医生完成,并由一名受训者(骨科住院医师(PGY 1-5)或成人重建研究员)协助。为了确定受训者和主治医生的杯放置准确性,我们使用计算机导航来确定受训者的徒手杯放置,然后由主治医生确定。最后通过计算机辅助手术导航确定和记录杯倾斜度和前倾角。对住院医师、研究员和主治医生获得的倾斜度和前倾角一致性以及导航系统提供的最终值进行比较。此外,为了评估培训和重复的作用,在研究员培训年度的前半段和后半段比较髋臼杯倾斜度和前倾角。除了偏离安全区的偏差率的比较采用卡方检验外,所有比较均采用学生 t 检验。显著性水平定义为 p 值≤0.05(95%置信区间),p 值≤0.1 为趋势显著。
与住院医师相比,主治医生的倾斜度偏差(p<0.001(倾斜度),p<0.001(版本))和杯的前倾角偏差(p<0.001(倾斜度),p<0.001(版本))以及与主治医生相比,研究员(p<0.001(倾斜度),p<0.001(版本))和所有受训者(p<0.001(倾斜度),p<0.001(版本))的位置从最终位置显著更大。住院医师偏离安全区的比例明显高于主治医生(p<0.001),但研究员与主治医生之间无显著差异(p=1.00)。与住院医师相比,研究员的倾斜度偏差从安全区的比例明显更低,为 3.3%(研究员)与 23.3%(住院医师)(p=0.002),且倾向于植入更水平的髋臼杯(45.6±6.6°(SD)和 42.7±4.3°,分别为研究员和住院医师,p=0.04)。与研究员相比,住院医师倾向于将杯植入比最终杯版本更前旋的位置(9.6±6.7°和 6.74±5.6°(SD),p=0.034)。主治医生徒手和最终(计算机辅助)杯放置的杯位置之间无统计学显著差异。
髋臼杯的准确和一致位置放置随着培训水平的提高而提高。与髋臼杯倾斜度相比,髋臼杯版本的准确和一致更难掌握。