Anterior-posterior (AP) x-rays are routinely taken following total hip replacement to assess placement and orientation of implanted components. Pelvic orientation at the time of an AP x-ray can influence projected implant orientation. 1. However, the extent of pelvic orientation varies between patients. 2. Without compensation for patient specific pelvic orientation, misleading measurements for implant orientation may be obtained. These measurements are used as indicators for post-operative dislocation stability and range of motion. Errors in which could result in differences between expectations and the true outcome achieved. The aim of this research was to develop a tool that could be utilised to determine pelvic orientation from an AP x-ray. An algorithm based on comparing projections of a statistical shape model of the pelvis (n=20) with the target X-ray was developed in MATLAB. For each iteration, the average shape was adjusted, rotated (to account for patient-specific pelvic orientation), projected onto a 2D plane, and the simulated outline determined. With respect to rotation, the pelvis was allowed to rotate about its transverse axis (pelvic flexion/extension) and anterior-posterior axis (pelvic adduction/abduction). Minimum root mean square error between the outline of the pelvis from the X-ray and the projected shape model outline was used to select final values for flexion and adduction. To test the algorithm, virtual X-rays (n=6) of different pelvis in known orientations were created using the algorithm described by Freud et al. 3. The true pelvic orientation for each case was randomly generated. Angular error was defined as the difference between the true pelvic orientation and that selected by the algorithm. Initial testing has exhibited similar accuracy in determining true pelvic flexion (x̄error = 2.74°, σerror=±2.21°) and true pelvic adduction (x̄error = 2.38°, σerror=±1.76°). For both pelvic flexion and adduction the maximum angular error observed was 5.62°. The minimum angular error for pelvic flexion was 0.37°, whilst for pelvic adduction it was 1.08°. Although the algorithm is still under development, the low mean, maximum, and standard deviations of error from initial testing indicate the approach is promising. Ongoing work will involve the use of additional landmarks for registration and training shapes to improve the shape model. This tool will allow surgeons to more accurately determine true acetabular orientation relative to the pelvis without the use of additional x-ray views or CT scans. In turn, this will help improve diagnoses of post-operative range of motion and dislocation stability

Introduction. In total hip arthroplasty, a high radiographic inclination angle (RI) of the acetabular component has been linked to short- and long-term complications. There are several factors that lead to RI outliers including cup version, pelvic orientation and angle of the cup introducer relative to the floor. The primary aim of this study was to analyse what increases the risk of having a cup with an RI outside the target zone when controlling cup orientation with a digital inclinometer. Methods. In this prospective study, we included 200 consecutive patients undergoing uncemented primary THA in the lateral decubitus position using a posterior approach. Preoperatively, the surgeon determined the target intraoperative inclination (IOI. target. ). The intra-operative inclination of the cup (IOI. cup. ) was measured with the aid of a digital inclinometer after seating of the acetabular component. Anteroposterior pelvic radiographs were made to measure the RI of the acetabular component. The target zones were defined as 30°-45° and 35°-45° of RI. The operative inclination relative to the sagittal plane of the pelvis (OI. math. ) was calculated based on the radiographic inclination and anteversion angle. The difference between two outcome measures was expressed as Δ. Results. The mean RI was 37.9° SD 4.7, there were 12 cases with RI outside the 30°– 45° zone (6%) and 53 outliers (26.5%) with RI outside the 35°-45° zone. The mean absolute ΔIOI. cup. -IOI. target. was 1.2° SD 1.0. The absolute ΔIOI. cup. -IOI. target. was less than 1° in 108 patients (54%), less than 2° in 160 patients (80%), less than 3° in 186 patients (93%), and in 14 patients (7%) the difference was 3°-5°. The mean pelvic motion (ΔOI. math. -IOI. cup. ) was 8.8° SD 3.9 (95% CI 8.2° to 9.3°). The absolute deviation from the mean ΔOI. math. -IOI. cup. , which corresponds with the amount of pelvic motion, was significantly higher in RI outliers compared with non-outliers for both the 30°-45° and 35°-45° inclination zone (7.4° SD 3.3 vs 2.8° SD 2.1 and 4.7° SD 2.8 vs 2.5° SD 2.0 respectively) (p<0.0001). A linear regression analysis demonstrated a strong correlation between ΔOI. math. -IOI. cup. and the RI of the cup (r. 2. =0.70; P<0.0001). A multiple regression was run to predict ΔOI. math. -IOI. cup. from gender, BMI, side and hip circumference. These variables statistically significantly predicted ΔOI. math. -OIa. cup. , F(4, 195) = 19,435, p<0.0001, R2 = 0.285, but only side (p=0.04) and hip circumference (p<0.0001) added statistically significantly to the prediction. Discussion and Conclusion. When using a digital inclinometer 94% of cups had a RI within a 30°-45° zone and 73.5% of cups within a 35°-45° zone using a predefined IOI. target. based on the patient's hip circumference. The difference between the IOI. target. and the IOI. cup. of the acetabular component was less than 3° in 93% and less than 5° in all patients signifying that the surgeons were able to implant the cup close to their chosen intra-operative orientation. Deviation from the mean ΔOI. math. -IOI. cup. was significantly bigger in the RI outliers indicating that RI outliers were caused by more or less than deviation of the sagittal plane of the pelvis at time of cup impaction

Introduction. Acetabular component orientation is an important determinant of outcome following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although surgeons aim to achieve optimal cup orientation, many studies demonstrate their inability to consistently achieve this. Factors that contribute are pelvic orientation and the surgeon's ability to correctly orient the cup at implantation. The goal of this study was to determine the accuracy with which surgeons can achieve cup orientation angles. Methods. In this in vitro study using a calibrated left and right sawbone hemipelvis model, participants (n=10) were asked to place a cup mounted on its introducer giving different targets. Measurements of cup orientation were made using a stereophotogrammetry protocol to measure radiographic inclination and operative anteversion (OA). A digital inclinometer was used to measure the intra-operative inclination (IOI) which is the angle of the cup introducer relative to the floor. First, the participant stated his or her preferred IOI and OA and positioned the cup accordingly. Second, the participant had to position the cup parallel to the anteversion of the transverse acetabular ligament (TAL). Third, the participant had to position the cup at IOI angles of 35°, 40° and 45°. Fourth, the participant used the mechanical alignment guide (45° of IOI and 30° of OA) to orient the cup. Each task was analysed separately and subgroup analysis included left versus right side and hip surgeons versus non-hip surgeons. Results. For the first task, hip surgeons preferred smaller IOI and larger OA than non-hip surgeons, but there was no significant difference in accuracy between both groups. When aiming for TAL, both surgeon groups performed similar, but accuracy on the non-dominant side was significantly better compared with the dominant side (mean deviation 0.6° SD 2.4 versus −2.6° SD 2.3) (p=0.004). When aiming for a specific IOI target of 35°, 40° or 45°, non-hip surgeons outperformed hip surgeons (mean deviation form target IOI 1.9° SD 2.7 versus −3.1° SD 3.8) (p<0.0001) with less variance (p=0.03). Contrary to version, accuracy on the dominant side was significantly better compared with the non-dominant side (mean deviation −0.4° SD 3.4 versus −2.1° SD 4.8). When using a mechanical guide, surgeons performed similar (0.6° SD 1.2 versus −0.4° SD 2.1 for inclination p=0.11 and −0.5° SD 2.6 versus −1.8° SD 3.3 for version p=0.22) and these values did not differ significantly from the actual IOI and OA of the mechanical guide. When using a mechanical guide, there was no difference in accuracy between the dominant and non-dominant side. Conclusion. There was no difference in accuracy between hip surgeons and non-hip surgeons when they aimed for their preferred IOI and OA or used a mechanical guide. When aiming for a specific IOI target, non-hip surgeons outperformed hip surgeons. Hip surgeons overestimate IOI and underestimate OA, presumably because this helps to achieve the desired radiographic cup orientation. Regarding accuracy, the non-dominant side was better for version and the dominant side for inclination. When aiming for a specific IOI and OA target, using a mechanical guide is significantly better than freehand cup orientation

We compared the orientation of the acetabular component obtained by a conventional manual technique with that using five different navigation systems.

Three surgeons carried out five implantations of an acetabular component with each navigation system, as well as manually, using an anatomical model. The orientation of the acetabular component, including inclination and anteversion, and its position was determined using a co-ordinate measuring machine.

The variation of the orientation of the acetabular component was higher in the conventional group compared with the navigated group. One experienced surgeon took significantly less time for the procedure. However, his placement of the component was no better than that of the less experienced surgeons. Significantly better inclination and anteversion (p < 0.001 for both) were obtained using navigation. These parameters were not significantly different between the surgeons when using the conventional technique (p = 0.966).

The use of computer navigation helps a surgeon to orientate the acetabular component with less variation regarding inclination and anteversion.