Validation for the effect of intra-exposure patient motion on the assessment of radiostereometric implant migration in a tibial component phantom study.

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of radiostereometry (RSA) research studies have long-term follow-up implant migration outcomes, which show ascending curves of implant migration with occasionally decreasing migration. After scrutinizing images and RSA scenes related to the alternating curves, we suppose that intra-exposure patient motion may contribute to that. The main purposes of this in vitro study were 1) to identify whether the patient motion in different directions could result in the inaccurate assessment of implant migration, and 2) to figure out which direction(s) accounted for the alternating curves.

HYPOTHESIS

It was hypothesized that the assessments of implant migration would be less precise and accurate than they could be when patient motion occurred, and such motion would contribute to the alternating curves of radiostereometric implant migration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A customized phantom, assembled with a tibial component, was designed for simulating intra-exposure patient motion during follow-up RSA examinations. Two different Roentgen tubes were used as the current standard of radiology departments. Radiographs were acquired in a uniplanar technical arrangement. Two defined protocols were conducted: one is to simulate implant migration outcomes at post-op, the early stage (6months), and the later stage (2 to 10years) ; during the later stage, the other is to mimic patient motion by phantom motion in the medial-lateral (x), distal-proximal (y), and anterior-posterior (z) axes.

RESULTS

Phantom motion could result in the inaccurate assessment of implant migration, and translations along the medial-lateral (x) axis were the most influenced by patient motion. Motion along the medial-lateral (x) axis could account for the curves with decreasing migration.

DISCUSSION

Our assessments of implant migration may be less precise and accurate than they could be when intra-exposure patient motion occurs. We probably neglect the importance of 100% simultaneous exposures, and the influence of patient motion on RSA accuracy and data reliability, due to the difficulty in detecting patient (micro)motion. Electronically synchronized exposures of two paired Roentgen tubes are 100% simultaneous for image acquisition, and they are thus highly recommended for the assessment of implant migration in RSA.

TYPE OF STUDY AND LEVEL OF PROOF

not applicable.