A custom-made guide-wire positioning device for Hip Surface Replacement Arthroplasty: description and first results

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hip surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) can be an alternative for total hip arthroplasty. The short and long-term outcome of hip surface replacement arthroplasty mainly relies on the optimal size and position of the femoral component. This can be defined before surgery with pre-operative templating. Reproducing the optimal, templated femoral implant position during surgery relies on guide wire positioning devices in combination with visual inspection and experience of the surgeon. Another method of transferring the templated position into surgery is by navigation or Computer Assisted Surgery (CAS). Though CAS is documented to increase accurate placement particularly in case of normal hip anatomy, it requires bulky equipment that is not readily available in each centre.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A custom made neck jig device is presented as well as the results of a pilot study.</p> <p>The device is produced based on data pre-operatively acquired with CT-scan. The position of the guide wire is chosen as the anatomical axis of the femoral neck. Adjustments to the design of the jig are made based on the orthopedic surgeon's recommendations for the drill direction. The SRA jig is designed as a slightly more-than-hemispherical cage to fit the anterior part of the femoral head. The cage is connected to an anterior neck support. Four knifes are attached on the central arch of the cage. A drill guide cylinder is attached to the cage, thus allowing guide wire positioning as pre-operatively planned.</p> <p>Custom made devices were tested in 5 patients scheduled for total hip arthroplasty. The orthopedic surgeons reported the practical aspects of the use of the neck-jig device. The retrieved femoral heads were analyzed to assess the achieved drill place in mm deviation from the predefined location and orientation compared to the predefined orientation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The orthopedic surgeons rated the passive stability, full contact with neck portion of the jig and knife contact with femoral head, positive. There were no guide failures. The jig unique position and the number of steps required to put the guide in place were rated 1, while the complexity to put the guide into place was rated 1-2. In all five cases the guide wire was accurately positioned. Maximum angular deviation was 2.9° and maximum distance between insertion points was 2.1 mm.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Pilot testing of a custom made jig for use during SRA indicated that the device was (1) successfully applied and user friendly and (2) allowed for accurate guide wire placement according to the preoperative plan.</p

Perioperative operating room efficiency can make simultaneous bilateral total hip arthroplasty cost-effective : a proposal for a value-sharing model

Abstract: Background Increasing demand for total hip arthroplasty (THA) and rising health-care costs have led hospitals to improve operating room (OR) efficiency. We compare the cost-effectiveness of a simultaneous bilateral THA to that of staged unilateral procedures following the implementation of OR efficiency strategies. Methods Between 2017 and 2019, 446 simultaneous and 238 staged bilateral primary THA patients (mean age 61.3 \ub1 12.0 years; 41.8% males/58.2% females; mean body mass index 27.2 \ub1 4.8 kg/m2) were treated by a single surgeon using an efficient, standardized workflow for efficient direct anterior approach THA on a standard operating table. There were no differences in inclusion criteria between both groups. From this cohort, 16 simultaneous bilateral THAs and 34 unilateral THAs were prospectively compared for cost-effectiveness using detailed timestamp measurements and data on personnel and material usage. Outcome was assessed based on complication and reoperation rate and patient-reported outcome measures. Results There was a complication rate of 1.2%, without a difference between patients who underwent a simultaneous THA vs those who underwent a staged primary THA (5/446; 1.1% vs 3/238; 1.3% P = .386). The mean OR time (patient in/out and turnover time) was 109.4 \ub1 19.8 minutes for bilateral THAs and 133.8 \ub1 12.8 minutes for 2 unilateral THAs (P < .001). An 18% time-saving and 14% cost-saving was achieved per procedure. Sharing 5% of the cost-saving with the surgeon brings benefit to both the hospital and surgeon. Conclusions Implementing OR efficiency improves cost-effectiveness of simultaneous bilateral THA compared to unilateral procedures. A new value-sharing model could be a solution to align incentives