Abstract:Background and Objectives: Even after the ‘death’ of Lewinnek’s safe zone, the orientation of the prosthetic cup in total hip arthroplasty is crucial for success. Accurate cup placement can be achieved with surgical navigation systems. The literature lacks study cohorts with large numbers of hips because postoperative computer tomography is required for the reproducible evaluation of the acetabular component position. To overcome this limitation, we used a validated software program, HipMatch, to accurately assess the cup orientation based on an anterior-posterior pelvic X-ray. The aim of this study were to (1) determine the intraoperative ‘individual adjustment’ of the cup positioning compared to the widely suggested target values of 40° of inclination and 15° of anteversion, and evaluate the (2) ‘accuracy’, (3) ‘precision’, and (4) robustness, regarding systematic errors, of an image-free navigation system in routine clinical use. Material and Methods: We performed a retrospective, accuracy study in a single surgeon case series of 367 navigated primary total hip arthroplasties (PiGalileoTM, Smith+Nephew) through an anterolateral approach performed between January 2011 and August 2018. The individual adjustments were defined as the differences between the target cup orientation (40° of inclination, 15° of anteversion) and the intraoperative registration with the navigation software. The accuracy was the difference between the intraoperative captured cup orientation and the actual postoperative cup orientation determined by HipMatch. The precision was analyzed by the standard deviation of the difference between the intraoperative registered and the actual cup orientation. The outliers were detected using the Tukey method. Results: Compared to the target value (40° inclination, 15° anteversion), the individual adjustments showed that the cups are impacted in higher inclination (mean 3.2° ± 1.6°, range, (−2)−18°) and higher anteversion (mean 5.0° ± 7.0°, range, (−15)−23°) (p < 0.001). The accuracy of the navigated cup placement was −1.7° ± 3.0°, ((−15)−11°) for inclination, and −4.9° ± 6.2° ((−28)−18°) for anteversion (p < 0.001). Precision of the system was higher for inclination (standard deviation SD 3.0°) compared to anteversion (SD 6.2°) (p < 0.001). We found no difference in the prevalence of outliers for inclination (1.9% (7 out of 367)) compared to anteversion (1.63% (6 out of 367), p = 0.78). The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the differences between the intraoperatively captured final position and the postoperatively determined actual position were spread evenly and randomly for inclination and anteversion. Conclusion: The evaluation of an image-less navigation system in this large study cohort provides accurate and reliable intraoperative feedback. The accuracy and the precision were inferior compared to CT-based navigation systems particularly regarding the anteversion. However the assessed values are certainly within a clinically acceptable range. This use of image-less navigation offers an additional tool to address challenging hip prothesis in the context of the hip−spine relationship to achieve adequate placement of the acetabular components with a minimum of outliers.

Is determination of the hip rotation center during computer-assisted surgery influenced by the pinless femoral sensor attachment method? An in vitro preliminary study comparing osseous pin fixation

Experimental validation of a pinless femoral reference array for computer-assisted hip arthroplasty

Determination of optimal non-invasive patient fixation methods for use in robotic hip replacement surgery--an in vitro study

Validation of a computer navigation system and a CT method for determination of the orientation of implanted acetabular cup in total hip arthroplasty: a cadaver study

Leg length and offset measures with a pinless femoral reference array during THA

A Cadaver Study to Evaluate the Accuracy of a New 3D Mini-Optical Navigation Tool for Total Hip Arthroplasty

Improving registration accuracy during total hip arthroplasty: a cadaver study of a new, 3-D mini-optical navigation system

Soft tissue dissection in placement of reference markers during computer aided total hip arthroplasty

Patient-Specific Guides for Accurate and Precise Positioning of Osseointegrated Implants in Transfemoral Amputations: A Proof-of-Concept In Vitro Study

Assessment of Accuracy and Reliability in Acetabular Cup Placement Using an iPhone/iPad System

Intraoperative Technology Use Improves Accuracy of Functional Safe Zone Targeting in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Validation of mixed-reality surgical navigation for glenoid axis pin placement in shoulder arthroplasty using a cadaveric model

Monitoring Hip Posture in Total Hip Arthroplasty Using an Inertial Measurement Unit-Based Hip Smart Trial System: an in Vitro Validation Experiment Using a Fixed Pelvis Model.

Determination of rotation center and diameter of femoral heads using off-the-shelf augmented reality hardware for navigation

Do the porous custom implants have a position consistent with the planning and allow anatomical reconstruction of hip center of rotation in complex acetabular revisions Paprosky III?

Image-Less THA Cup Navigation in Clinical Routine Setup: Individual Adjustments, Accuracy, Precision, and Robustness

Accuracy of cup placement in total hip arthroplasty by means of a mechanical positioning device: a comprehensive cadaveric 3d analysis of 16 specimens

Development and evaluation of an image-free computer-assisted impingement detection technique for total hip arthroplasty

Measuring leg length and offset with an imageless navigation system during total hip arthroplasty: is it really accurate?

The accuracy and precision of acetabular implant measurements from CT imaging

Toward subtalar joint axis–driven computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing foot orthoses: Reliability of a noninvasive clinical scanning protocol