Dataset Information

Pre-operative templating for total hip arthroplasty: How does radiographic technique and calibration marker placement affect image magnification?

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Pre-operative templating using digital radiography is an effective method of planning for total hip arthroplasty (THA) and requires a generalised fixed magnification factor (MF) or external calibration markers (ECM). The effect on image magnification when changing source-to-image distance (SID), object-to-image distance (OID) and different imaging conditions is not well described. This study aims to quantify the range of effects manipulation of radiographic parameters can have on image magnification across different body habitus and imaging conditions.

Methods

A simple phantom study was performed. A 25 mm ECM was placed at eight different OID values along the anterior-posterior phantom plane at three different SID values and imaging conditions, and X-rays were obtained. On each radiograph, the ECM was measured using a line calliper tool by three radiographers and recorded. The MF was calculated and recorded.

Results

The smallest observed image MF was 1.16, for an 8 cm OID, 120 cm SID with the ECM placed within the central ray and the X-ray detector in bucky underneath the X-ray table. The largest image MF was 1.40 for a 15 cm OID, 100 cm SID with the X-ray detector placed underneath an emergency department imaging trolley.

Conclusions

Digital pre-operative templating for THA relies on accurate radiographic positioning and is dependent of the patient body habitus, radiographic parameters and imaging conditions selected by the radiographer. The use of appropriately positioned ECMs - placed medially between the patient's internally rotated legs at the level of the greater trochanter, lowers the potential for magnification inaccuracies.

SUBMITTER: Holliday M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8424328 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Digital templating systems foster patient-specific measurements for preoperative planning. Questions/Purposes:We aim (1) to verify the accuracy of a templating system, (2) to describe the effects of scaling marker position on the accuracy of digital templating of the hip, and (3) to provide a practical guide for scaling marker position using patient body mass index (BMI). Methods:A scaling sphere was placed in five positions along the anterior-posterior axis of an acetabular implant and pelvis phantom, and x-rays were obtained. Each radiograph was templated for the acetabular component and recorded. A retrospective review identified CT scans of preoperative hip arthroplasty cases. The center of the greater trochanter was calculated from these CT scans as the percent distance from the anterior thigh and recorded with the patient's BMI. Results:By centering the scaling sphere on the acetabular component, an accurate cup size was achieved. A difference of 3.5 cm in sphere placement resulted in a full cup size magnification error. Positioning the scaling sphere at the level of the pubic symphysis resulted in a difference of four cup sizes. This patient population had an average BMI of 28.72 kg/m2 (standard deviation 6.26 kg/m2) and an average position of the center of the greater trochanter of 51% (standard deviation of 6%) from the anterior surface of thigh. Conclusions:Digital templating relies on scaling marker position to accurately estimate implant size. Based on the findings in this study, scaling markers for hip imaging should be placed laterally, mid-thigh in the anterior-posterior direction for patients with a BMI between 25 and 40 kg/m2. If abnormal hip anatomy or extremes of BMI are discovered, then scaling sphere positioning should be optimized on a case-by-case basis. Digital templating systems for total hip arthroplasty must use precisely placed scaling markers at the level of the hip joint to allow for accurate implant size estimation.

Project description:ImportanceSurgical team communication is a critical component of operative efficiency. The factors underlying optimal communication, including team turnover, role composition, and mutual familiarity, remain underinvestigated in the operating room.ObjectiveTo assess staff turnover, trainee involvement, and surgeon staff preferences in terms of intraoperative efficiency.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective analysis of staff characteristics and operating times for all total joint arthroplasties was performed at a tertiary academic medical center by 5 surgeons from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2021, to February 18, 2022. The study included cases with primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) comprising all primary total joint arthroplasties performed over the 1-year study interval.ExposuresIntraoperative turnover among nonsurgical staff, presence of trainees, and presence of surgeon-preferred staff.Main outcomes and measuresIncision time, procedure time, and room time for each surgery. Multivariable regression analyses between operative duration, presence of surgeon-preferred staff, and turnover among nonsurgical personnel were conducted.ResultsA total of 641 cases, including 279 THAs (51% female; median age, 64 [IQR, 56.3-71.5] years) and 362 TKAs (66% [238] female; median age, 68 [IQR, 61.1-74.1] years) were considered. Turnover among circulating nurses was associated with a significant increase in operative duration in both THAs and TKAs, with estimated differences of 19.6 minutes (SE, 3.5; P < .001) of room time in THAs and 14.0 minutes (SE, 3.1; P < .001) of room time in TKAs. The presence of a preferred anesthesiologist or surgical technician was associated with significant decreases of 26.5 minutes (SE, 8.8; P = .003) of procedure time and 12.6 minutes (SE, 4.0; P = .002) of room time, respectively, in TKAs. The presence of a surgeon-preferred vendor was associated with a significant increase in operative duration in both THAs (26.3 minutes; SE, 7.3; P < .001) and TKAs (29.6 minutes; SE, 9.6; P = .002).Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that turnover among operative staff is associated with procedural inefficiency. In contrast, the presence of surgeon-preferred staff may facilitate intraoperative efficiency. Administrative or technologic support of perioperative communication and team continuity may help improve operative efficiency.