Free Hip Arthroplasty Templating Software - Does it Work?

Arthroplast Today

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.

Published: October 2023

AI Article Synopsis

  • Preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty (THA) is crucial, and while digital templating software can be costly, the free program Detroit Bone Setter is being studied for accuracy in sizing implants.
  • The study involved 65 patients and compared templated to actual implant sizes, revealing that while femoral component sizes were accurately templated, acetabular components were overestimated by an average of 3.6 mm.
  • Overall, Detroit Bone Setter shows promise due to its cost-effectiveness, but further validation is necessary before endorsing it as a primary method for THA templating.

Article Abstract

Background: Preoperative planning is important for successful total hip arthroplasty (THA) and has been historically performed using acetate templates. Digital software templating has been adopted for evaluating implant size, position, and alignment. Commercial software can be expensive, but free programs exist. Detroit Bone Setter (detroitbonesetter.com, Detroit, MI) is a freely available templating program, but hasn't been validated. Our study reports this program's accuracy for templating THA.

Methods: Sixty-five patients undergoing THA between 2017 and 2022 at 2 hospitals were included. All cases were templated by the senior author or orthopaedic trauma fellow prospectively or retrospectively in a blinded fashion. Direct anterior or posterior approaches were used based on attending surgeon's preference. A student's t-test was used to compare means of templated vs actual implant sizes of femoral and acetabular components.

Results: There was no significant difference between implanted (mean [M] = 6.4, standard deviation [SD] = 2.0) and templated femoral component sizes (M = 5.7, SD = 2.1). There was a significant difference between implanted (M = 57.0, SD = 3.9) and templated acetabular component sizes (M = 53.4, SD = 3.0). Bland-Altman testing demonstrated femoral components with positive measurement bias of 0.62, indicating slight overestimation of implant size. Acetabular component size was overestimated with positive measurement bias of 3.6 mm.

Conclusions: Detroit Bone Setter is advantageous as it is freely available and supports most major company implants. It accurately templated femoral component size but consistently overestimated acetabular component size by 3.6 mm. Further studies are needed prior to recommending its routine use for templating THA when other validated methods exist. It could be used with caution when no other methods are available.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10498402PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2023.101182DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

acetabular component
12
component size
12
hip arthroplasty
8
implant size
8
detroit bone
8
bone setter
8
difference implanted
8
templated femoral
8
femoral component
8
component sizes
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!