Computer-assisted vs conventional mechanical jig technique in hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
To compare the effectiveness of computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and mechanical jig technique in hip resurfacing arthroplasty, we reviewed 176 hip resurfacing arthroplasty performed in 158 patients. The initial 131 hips were resurfaced using the conventional mechanical jig technique, and the remaining 45 hips with the CAS technique. The demographic data of the patients were similar for both techniques. Follow-up radiographs taken 2 months after the surgery showed patients in the CAS technique having a significantly better alignment of the femoral component on the frontal and sagittal planes. There was no difference in the risk of implant notching on the femoral neck for both techniques. The implant sizes were similar for both techniques; thus, the amount of bone stock preserved was not technique specific.
Resubal
Jose Rafael E
JR
Arnold Janssen Centre, Brisbane Private Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Morgan
David A F
DA
D000077:Acetabulum / Q000601:surgery; D019644:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Q000379:methods*; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D005260:Female; D005270:Femur Head / Q000601:surgery; D006622:Hip Prosthesis; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017755:Prosthesis Fitting; D025321:Surgery, Computer-Assisted; D016896:Treatment Outcome