Fabricio Marcelo Zerbetto, Rudelli Bruno Alves, Miyahara Helder de Souza, Ejnisman Leandro, Gurgel Henrique de Melo Campos, Croci Alberto Tesconi
Grupo de Quadril e Artroplastias, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2022 Sep 5;58(2):246-251. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1750757. eCollection 2023 Apr.
The present study aims to assess the reproducibility of digital planning for cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) among surgeons with different levels of experience. In addition, it attempts to determine the degree of planning reliability based on a contralateral THA or on a spherical marker positioned at the greater trochanter for calibration. Two evaluators with different experience levels (A1 and A2) performed independently the retrospective digital surgical planning of 64 cementless THAs. Next, we compared the planning with the implants used in the surgery. The reproducibility was excellent when planning and implants were identical; proper in case of a single-unit variation; and inappropriate if there was variation in two or more units. The present analysis also determined the calibration accuracy between the contralateral THA and the spherical marker at the greater trochanter level. The present study demonstrated greater success when the most experienced evaluator performed the planning and greater accuracy for the contralateral THA. When splitting the analysis per parameter (contralateral THA or spherical marker), there was a statistical difference only for the planning of A1 and the implants used in the surgery. This difference occurred in the excellent category, with 67.3% for contralateral THA compared with 30.6% for a spherical marker ( <0.001), and in the inappropriate category, with 7.1% for contralateral THA compared with 30.6% for a spherical marker ( <0.001). Digital planning is more accurate when performed by an experienced evaluator. The contralateral prosthesis head was a better reference than a marker on the greater trochanter.
本研究旨在评估不同经验水平的外科医生在非骨水泥型全髋关节置换术(THA)中进行数字规划的可重复性。此外,本研究还试图根据对侧THA或置于大转子处的球形标记物进行校准,来确定规划的可靠程度。
两名经验水平不同的评估者(A1和A2)独立对64例非骨水泥型THA进行了回顾性数字手术规划。接下来,我们将规划与手术中使用的植入物进行了比较。当规划与植入物完全相同时,可重复性极佳;当存在单个单元差异时,可重复性良好;当存在两个或更多单元差异时,则不合适。本分析还确定了对侧THA与大转子水平处球形标记物之间的校准准确性。
本研究表明,经验最丰富的评估者进行规划时成功率更高,对侧THA的准确性也更高。当按参数(对侧THA或球形标记物)进行分析时,仅A1的规划与手术中使用的植入物之间存在统计学差异。这种差异出现在极佳类别中,对侧THA为67.3%,而球形标记物为30.6%(<0.001);在不合适类别中,对侧THA为7.1%,而球形标记物为30.6%(<0.001)。
由经验丰富的评估者进行数字规划时更准确。对侧假体头比大转子上的标记物是更好的参考。