The journey to preventing dislocation after total hip arthroplasty

2022 ◽  
Vol 104-B (1) ◽  
pp. 8-11
Author(s):  
Joshua Wright-Chisem ◽  
Ameer M. Elbuluk ◽  
David J. Mayman ◽  
Seth A. Jerabek ◽  
Peter K. Sculco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Preoperative Planning ◽  
Computer Navigation ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Improved Outcomes ◽  
Modular Implants ◽  
Traditional Approaches

Dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a well-known and potentially devastating complication. Clinicians have used many strategies in attempts to prevent dislocation since the introduction of THA. While the importance of postoperative care cannot be ignored, particular emphasis has been placed on preoperative planning in the prevention of dislocation. The strategies have progressed from more traditional approaches, including modular implants, the size of the femoral head, and augmentation of the offset, to newer concepts, including patient-specific component positioning combined with computer navigation, robotics, and the use of dual-mobility implants. As clinicians continue to pursue improved outcomes and reduced complications, these concepts will lay the foundation for future innovation in THA and ultimately improved outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):8–11.

scholarly journals Value of 3D Preoperative Planning for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Based on Biplanar Weightbearing Radiographs

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Knafo ◽  
F. Houfani ◽  
B. Zaharia ◽  
F. Egrise ◽  
I. Clerc-Urmès ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Preoperative Planning ◽  
Femoral Stem ◽  
Leg Length ◽  
Femoral Offset ◽  
Postoperative Result ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Planning Software ◽  
Navigated Surgery

Two-dimensional (2D) planning on standard radiographs for total hip arthroplasty may not be sufficiently accurate to predict implant sizing or restore leg length and femoral offset, whereas 3D planning avoids magnification and projection errors. Furthermore, weightbearing measures are not available with computed tomography (CT) and leg length and offset are rarely checked postoperatively using any imaging modality. Navigation can usually achieve a surgical plan precisely, but the choice of that plan remains key, which is best guided by preoperative planning. The study objectives were therefore to (1) evaluate the accuracy of stem/cup size prediction using dedicated 3D planning software based on biplanar radiographic imaging under weightbearing and (2) compare the preplanned leg length and femoral offset with the postoperative result. This single-centre, single-surgeon prospective study consisted of a cohort of 33 patients operated on over 24 months. The routine clinical workflow consisted of preoperative biplanar weightbearing imaging, 3D surgical planning, navigated surgery to execute the plan, and postoperative biplanar imaging to verify the radiological outcomes in 3D weightbearing. 3D planning was performed with the dedicated hipEOS® planning software to determine stem and cup size and position, plus 3D anatomical and functional parameters, in particular variations in leg length and femoral offset. Component size planning accuracy was 94% (31/33) within one size for the femoral stem and 100% (33/33) within one size for the acetabular cup. There were no significant differences between planned versus implanted femoral stem size or planned versus measured changes in leg length or offset. Cup size did differ significantly, tending towards implanting one size larger when there was a difference. Biplanar radiographs plus hipEOS planning software showed good reliability for predicting implant size, leg length, and femoral offset and postoperatively provided a check on the navigated surgery. Compared to previous studies, the predictive results were better than 2D planning on conventional radiography and equal to 3D planning on CT images, with lower radiation dose, and in the weightbearing position.

Redesign of the Femoral Stem for a Total Hip Arthroplasty for Additive Manufacturing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley Hanks ◽  
Shantanab Dinda ◽  
Sanjay Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Lattice Structure ◽  
Stress Shielding ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Hip Implants ◽  
Hip Implant ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Multiple Materials

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an increasingly common procedure that replaces all or part of the hip joint. The average age of patients is decreasing, which in turn increases the need for more durable implants. Revisions in hip implants are frequently caused by three primary issues: femoral loading, poor fixation, and stress shielding. First, as the age of hip implant patients decreases, the hip implants are seeing increased loading, beyond what they were traditionally designed for. Second, traditional implants may have roughened surfaces but are not fully porous which would allow bone to grow in and through the implant. Third, traditional implants are too stiff, causing more load to be carried by the implant and shielding the bone from stress. Ultimately this stress shielding leads to bone resorption and implant loosening. Additive manufacturing (AM) presents a unique opportunity for enhanced performance by allowing for personalized medicine and increased functionality through geometrically complex parts. Much research has been devoted to how AM can be used to improve surgical implants through lattice structures. To date, the authors have found no studies that have performed a complete 3D lattice structure optimization in patient specific anatomy. This paper discusses the general design of an AM hip implant that is personalized for patient specific anatomy and proposes a workflow for optimizing a lattice structure within the implant. Using this design workflow, several lattice structured AM hip implants of various unit cell types are optimized. A solid hip implant is compared against the optimized hip implants. It appears the AM hip implant with a tetra lattice outperforms the other implant by reducing stiffness and allowing for greater bone ingrowth. Ultimately it was found that AM software still has many limitations associated with attempting complex optimizations with multiple materials in patient specific anatomy. Though software limitations prevented a full 3D optimization in patient specific anatomy, the challenges associated such an approach and limitations of the current software are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document