Does Fluoroscopic-Aided Enabling Technology Improve Acetabular Component Position and Reduce Radiation Exposure in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty?

IF 0.8 Q4 SURGERY Surgical technology international Pub Date : 2025-01-16
David A Crawford, Todd E Bertrand, Jacob Alexander, Adolph V Lombardi, Keith R Berend
{"title":"Does Fluoroscopic-Aided Enabling Technology Improve Acetabular Component Position and Reduce Radiation Exposure in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty?","authors":"David A Crawford, Todd E Bertrand, Jacob Alexander, Adolph V Lombardi, Keith R Berend","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Accurate acetabular component positioning is crucial for the success of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Malplacement of the acetabular component increases the risk of post-surgery complications, most notably dislocation.1 Furthermore, malposition can also result in wear of the polyethylene liner, limited range of motion, and osteolysis.2,3 These complications have led to controversy regarding the optimal acetabular component position. The historic Lewinnek \"safe zone\" defines the ideal acetabular placement as within 40° +/- 10° abduction and 15° +/- 10° anteversion.4 However, recent controversy has emerged regarding the ideal placement of the acetabular component with one systematic review showing acetabular components placed within the Lewinnek parameters having no significant difference in dislocation rate to those components placed outside the \"safe zone.\"5 Callanan et al. found that a range of 30-45° of abduction and 5-25° of anteversion was the ideal target zone while other studies have argued that the historic safe zone, while useful, should not be considered completely protective against dislocations.6,7 In addition, the spinopelvic relationship as it relates to changes in acetabular cup orientation from a standing to seated position may alter cup placement from the \"ideal\" position to accommodate reduced spinopelvic junction motion and limit the risk of postoperative instability.8 Secondary to risk of acetabular cup malposition during THA, fluoroscopically aided enabling technology (FET) has gained popularity recently, secondary to proposed benefits of improved accuracy of intraoperative component positioning over standard landmark identification or the use of fluoroscopy alone (FA), as well as minimizing the risk of significant postoperative leg length discrepancies.9,10 In addition, further factors such as not needing special preoperative imaging, minimal change to workflow or surgical approach, and the possibility of reduced operative times have made the use of this technology appealing.11 In addition to the debate regarding ideal acetabular component position to reduce postoperative complications, there has been ongoing discussion regarding the potential detrimental effects of cumulative radiation dose to the surgeon, patient, and operating room personnel when using fluoroscopy for placement of the acetabular component in direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty (DAA-THA). Prior studies have shown that during DAA- THA, average radiation time was 15.1 seconds (secs), and exposure was 2.00mGy with increasing exposure seen as patient body mass index (BMI) increased.12,13 In theory, FET may help to reduce radiation exposure through less use of intraoperative fluoroscopy for confirmation of acetabular component position. The questions proposed in this study are: 1) Does FET improve the accuracy of acetabular component position versus FA in DAA-THA? and 2) Does FET reduce fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure compared to FA in DAA-THA, and is this dependent upon the BMI of the patient?</p>","PeriodicalId":22194,"journal":{"name":"Surgical technology international","volume":"45 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical technology international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accurate acetabular component positioning is crucial for the success of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Malplacement of the acetabular component increases the risk of post-surgery complications, most notably dislocation.1 Furthermore, malposition can also result in wear of the polyethylene liner, limited range of motion, and osteolysis.2,3 These complications have led to controversy regarding the optimal acetabular component position. The historic Lewinnek "safe zone" defines the ideal acetabular placement as within 40° +/- 10° abduction and 15° +/- 10° anteversion.4 However, recent controversy has emerged regarding the ideal placement of the acetabular component with one systematic review showing acetabular components placed within the Lewinnek parameters having no significant difference in dislocation rate to those components placed outside the "safe zone."5 Callanan et al. found that a range of 30-45° of abduction and 5-25° of anteversion was the ideal target zone while other studies have argued that the historic safe zone, while useful, should not be considered completely protective against dislocations.6,7 In addition, the spinopelvic relationship as it relates to changes in acetabular cup orientation from a standing to seated position may alter cup placement from the "ideal" position to accommodate reduced spinopelvic junction motion and limit the risk of postoperative instability.8 Secondary to risk of acetabular cup malposition during THA, fluoroscopically aided enabling technology (FET) has gained popularity recently, secondary to proposed benefits of improved accuracy of intraoperative component positioning over standard landmark identification or the use of fluoroscopy alone (FA), as well as minimizing the risk of significant postoperative leg length discrepancies.9,10 In addition, further factors such as not needing special preoperative imaging, minimal change to workflow or surgical approach, and the possibility of reduced operative times have made the use of this technology appealing.11 In addition to the debate regarding ideal acetabular component position to reduce postoperative complications, there has been ongoing discussion regarding the potential detrimental effects of cumulative radiation dose to the surgeon, patient, and operating room personnel when using fluoroscopy for placement of the acetabular component in direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty (DAA-THA). Prior studies have shown that during DAA- THA, average radiation time was 15.1 seconds (secs), and exposure was 2.00mGy with increasing exposure seen as patient body mass index (BMI) increased.12,13 In theory, FET may help to reduce radiation exposure through less use of intraoperative fluoroscopy for confirmation of acetabular component position. The questions proposed in this study are: 1) Does FET improve the accuracy of acetabular component position versus FA in DAA-THA? and 2) Does FET reduce fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure compared to FA in DAA-THA, and is this dependent upon the BMI of the patient?

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
141
期刊最新文献
Does Fluoroscopic-Aided Enabling Technology Improve Acetabular Component Position and Reduce Radiation Exposure in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty? Intact Fish Skin Graft for the Treatment of Burns: Deep Partial Thickness Burns and Beyond. Labia Majora Approach to Aesthetic and Functional Complaints. A Standardized Topographic Labia Majora Classification. Assessment of Hemostatic Powder in Order to Prevent Staple Line Bleeding After Sleeve Gastrectomy in High-Risk Patients: A Multicentric Randomized Controlled Trial. Short-Term Outcomes Following Operative Repair of the Burst Abdomen: A Retrospective Review of Different Techniques.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1