Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Peking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Beijing, China.
School of Medicine, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Orthop Surg. 2022 Jun;14(6):1152-1160. doi: 10.1111/os.13298. Epub 2022 May 7.
This study aims to compare the accuracy of CT-based preoperative planning with that of acetate templating in predicting implant size, neck length, and neck cut length, and to evaluate the reproducibility of the two methods.
This prospective study was conducted between August 2020 and March 2021. Patients who underwent elective primary total hip arthroplasty by a single surgeon were assessed for eligibility. The included patients underwent both acetate templating and CT-based planning by two observers after the operation. Each observer conducted both acetate templating and CT-based planning twice for each case. The outcome measures included the following: (1) the accuracy of surgical planning in predicting implant size, calcar length, and neck length, which was defined as the difference between the planned size and length and the actual size and length; (2) reproducibility of the two planning techniques, which were assessed by inter-observer and intra-observer reliability analysis; (3) the influence of potential confounding factors on planning accuracy, which was evaluated using generalized estimating equations.
A total of 57 cases were included in the study. CT-based planning was more accurate than acetate templating for predicting cup size (93% vs 79%, p < 0.001) and stem size (93% vs 75%, p < 0.001). When assessed by mean absolute difference, the comparison between acetate templating and CT-based planning was 4.28 mm vs 3.74 mm (p = 0.122) in predicting neck length and 3.05 mm vs 2.93 mm (p = 0.731) in predicting neck cut length. In the inter-observer reliability analysis, an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.790 was achieved for predicting cup size, and an ICC of 0.966 was achieved for predicting stem size using CT-based planning. In terms of intra-observer reliability, Observer 1 achieved an ICC of 0.803 for predicting cup size and 0.965 for predicting stem size in CT-based planning. Observer 2 achieved ICC values of 0.727 and 0.959 for predicting cup and stem sizes, respectively. The average planning time was 6.48 ± 1.55 min for CT-based planning and 6.12 ± 1.40 min for acetate templating (p = 0.015).
The CT-based planning system is more accurate than acetate templating for predicting implant size and has good reproducibility in total hip arthroplasty.
本研究旨在比较 CT 术前规划与醋酸酯模板在预测种植体大小、颈长和颈切长度方面的准确性,并评估两种方法的可重复性。
这是一项前瞻性研究,于 2020 年 8 月至 2021 年 3 月进行。评估接受单名外科医生行择期初次全髋关节置换术的患者是否符合入选标准。纳入的患者在术后由两位观察者分别进行醋酸酯模板和基于 CT 的规划。每位观察者对每个病例进行了两次醋酸酯模板和基于 CT 的规划。观察指标包括:(1)手术规划在预测种植体大小、距骨长度和颈长方面的准确性,定义为计划大小和长度与实际大小和长度之间的差异;(2)两种规划技术的可重复性,通过观察者间和观察者内可靠性分析进行评估;(3)使用广义估计方程评估潜在混杂因素对规划准确性的影响。
本研究共纳入 57 例患者。在预测杯大小(93%对 79%,p<0.001)和柄大小(93%对 75%,p<0.001)方面,基于 CT 的规划比醋酸酯模板更准确。当以平均绝对差值评估时,醋酸酯模板和基于 CT 的规划在预测颈长方面的差异为 4.28mm 对 3.74mm(p=0.122),在预测颈切长度方面的差异为 3.05mm 对 2.93mm(p=0.731)。在观察者间可靠性分析中,基于 CT 的规划预测杯大小的组内相关系数(ICC)为 0.790,预测柄大小的 ICC 为 0.966。在观察者内可靠性方面,观察者 1 预测杯大小的 ICC 为 0.803,预测基于 CT 的规划柄大小的 ICC 为 0.965。观察者 2 预测杯和柄大小的 ICC 值分别为 0.727 和 0.959。基于 CT 的规划的平均规划时间为 6.48±1.55 分钟,醋酸酯模板为 6.12±1.40 分钟(p=0.015)。
基于 CT 的规划系统在预测种植体大小方面比醋酸酯模板更准确,在全髋关节置换术中具有良好的可重复性。