Hamad Nazmy, Giovanni Solitro, Benjamin Domb, Farid Amirouche
{"title":"Comparative Study of Alternative Methods for Measuring Leg Length Discrepancy after Robot-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty.","authors":"Hamad Nazmy, Giovanni Solitro, Benjamin Domb, Farid Amirouche","doi":"10.3390/bioengineering11080853","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Our study addresses the lack of consensus on measuring leg length discrepancy (LLD) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). We will assess the inter-observer variability and correlation between the five most commonly used LLD methods and investigate the use of trigonometric principles in overcoming the limitations of current techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>LLD was measured on postoperative AP pelvic radiographs using five conventional methods. CT images created a 3D computer model of the pelvis and femur. The resulting models were projected onto a 2D, used to measure LLD by the five methods. The measurements were evaluated via Taguchi analysis, a statistical method identifying the process's most influential factors. The approach was used to assess the new trigonometric method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Conventional methods demonstrated poor correlation. Methods referenced to the centers of the femoral heads were insensitive to LLD originating outside the acetabular cup. Methods referencing either the inter-ischial line or the inter-obturator foramina to the lesser trochanter were sensitive to acetabular and femoral components. Trigonometry-based measurements showed a higher correlation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results underscore clinicians' need to specify the methods used to assess LLD. Applying trigonometric principles was shown to be accurate and reliable, but it was contingent on proper radiographic alignment.</p>","PeriodicalId":8874,"journal":{"name":"Bioengineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11351844/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioengineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11080853","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Our study addresses the lack of consensus on measuring leg length discrepancy (LLD) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). We will assess the inter-observer variability and correlation between the five most commonly used LLD methods and investigate the use of trigonometric principles in overcoming the limitations of current techniques.
Methods: LLD was measured on postoperative AP pelvic radiographs using five conventional methods. CT images created a 3D computer model of the pelvis and femur. The resulting models were projected onto a 2D, used to measure LLD by the five methods. The measurements were evaluated via Taguchi analysis, a statistical method identifying the process's most influential factors. The approach was used to assess the new trigonometric method.
Results: Conventional methods demonstrated poor correlation. Methods referenced to the centers of the femoral heads were insensitive to LLD originating outside the acetabular cup. Methods referencing either the inter-ischial line or the inter-obturator foramina to the lesser trochanter were sensitive to acetabular and femoral components. Trigonometry-based measurements showed a higher correlation.
Conclusions: Our results underscore clinicians' need to specify the methods used to assess LLD. Applying trigonometric principles was shown to be accurate and reliable, but it was contingent on proper radiographic alignment.
期刊介绍:
Aims
Bioengineering (ISSN 2306-5354) provides an advanced forum for the science and technology of bioengineering. It publishes original research papers, comprehensive reviews, communications and case reports. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. All aspects of bioengineering are welcomed from theoretical concepts to education and applications. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. There are, in addition, four key features of this Journal:
● We are introducing a new concept in scientific and technical publications “The Translational Case Report in Bioengineering”. It is a descriptive explanatory analysis of a transformative or translational event. Understanding that the goal of bioengineering scholarship is to advance towards a transformative or clinical solution to an identified transformative/clinical need, the translational case report is used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles that may guide other similar transformative/translational undertakings.
● Manuscripts regarding research proposals and research ideas will be particularly welcomed.
● Electronic files and software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.
● We also accept manuscripts communicating to a broader audience with regard to research projects financed with public funds.
Scope
● Bionics and biological cybernetics: implantology; bio–abio interfaces
● Bioelectronics: wearable electronics; implantable electronics; “more than Moore” electronics; bioelectronics devices
● Bioprocess and biosystems engineering and applications: bioprocess design; biocatalysis; bioseparation and bioreactors; bioinformatics; bioenergy; etc.
● Biomolecular, cellular and tissue engineering and applications: tissue engineering; chromosome engineering; embryo engineering; cellular, molecular and synthetic biology; metabolic engineering; bio-nanotechnology; micro/nano technologies; genetic engineering; transgenic technology
● Biomedical engineering and applications: biomechatronics; biomedical electronics; biomechanics; biomaterials; biomimetics; biomedical diagnostics; biomedical therapy; biomedical devices; sensors and circuits; biomedical imaging and medical information systems; implants and regenerative medicine; neurotechnology; clinical engineering; rehabilitation engineering
● Biochemical engineering and applications: metabolic pathway engineering; modeling and simulation
● Translational bioengineering