Radiological Inclination (RI) is defined as the angle formed between the acetabular axis and the longitudinal axis when projected onto the coronal plane. Higher RI angles are associated with adverse outcomes. Primary aim: to investigate the effect of adjusting patient pelvic position in the transverse plane by using a ‘head-down’ (HD) operating table position. This was to determine, when aiming for 35° Apparent Operative Inclination (AOI), which operating table position most accurately achieved a target post-operative RI of 42°. N=270. Patients were randomised to one of three possible operating table positions: 0°HD (Horizontal), 7°HD, or Y°HD (Patient Specific Table Position) Operating table position was controlled using a digital inclinometer. RI was measured using EBRA software.Introduction
Methods
The current orthopaedic literature demonstrates a clear relationship between acetabular component positioning, polyethylene wear and risk of dislocation following Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Problems with edge loading, stripe wear and squeaking are also associated with higher acetabular inclination angles, particularly in hard-on-hard bearing implants. The important parameters of acetabular component positioning are depth, height, version and inclination. Acetabular component depth, height and version can be controlled with intra-operative reference to the transverse acetabular ligament. Control of acetabular component inclination, particularly in the lateral decubitus position, is more difficult and remains a challenge for the Orthopaedic Surgeon. Lewinnek et al described a ‘safe zone’ of acetabular component orientation: Radiological acetabular inclination of 40 ± 10° and radiological anteversion of 15 ± 10°. Accurate implantation of the acetabular component within the ‘safe zone’ of radiological inclination is dependent on operative inclination, operative version and pelvic position. Traditionally during surgery, the acetabular component has been inserted with an operative inclination of 45°. This assumes that patient positioning is correct and does not take into account the impact of operative anteversion or patient malpositioning. However, precise patient positioning in order to orientate acetabular components using this method cannot always be relied upon. Hill et al demonstrated a mean 6.9° difference between photographically simulated radiological inclination and the post-operative radiological inclination. The most likely explanation was felt to be adduction of the uppermost hemipelvis in the lateral decubitus position. The study changed the practice of the senior author, with target operative inclination now 35° rather than 40° as before, aiming to achieve a post-operative radiological inclination of 42° ± 5°. To determine which of the following three techniques of acetabular component implantation most accurately obtains a desired operative inclination of 35 degrees:
Freehand Modified (35°) Mechanical Alignment Guide, or Digital inclinometer assistedBackground
Aim
Operative inclination (OI) is defined as the angle between the acetabular axis and the sagittal plane. With the patient in the true lateral decubitus position, this corresponds to the angle formed between the handle of the acetabular component inserter and the theatre floor intra-operatively. The primary study aim was to determine which method of acetabular component insertion most accurately allows the surgeon to obtain a target OI of 35o. 270 consecutive patients undergoing cementless THA were randomised to one of three possible methods for acetabular component implantation: 1. Freehand, 2. 35o mechanical alignment guide (MAG), or 3. Digital inclinometer assisted Two surgeons participated. Target OI was 35o in all cases. OI was measured using a digital inclinometer. For the freehand and MAG cases, the surgeon was blinded to inclinometer readings intra-operatively.Introduction
Patients/Materials & Methods
