Similar patient positioning: A key factor in follow-up studies when using model-based radiostereometric analysis of the hip

Guideline for RSA and CT-RSA implant migration measurements: an update of standardizations and recommendations

Opening remarks: These guidelines are the result of discussions within a diverse group of RSA researchers. They were approved in December 2023 by the board and selected members of the International Radiostereometry Society to update the guidelines by Valstar et al. [1]. By adhering to these guidelines, RSA studies will become more transparent and consistent in execution, presentation, reporting, and interpretation. Both authors and reviewers of scientific papers using RSA may use these guidelines, summarized in the Checklist, as a reference. Deviations from these guidelines should have the underlying rationale stated.

State of the Art in Radiostereometric Analysis for Tibial Baseplate Migration and Future Research Directions

Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) measures movement (migration) of a baseplate relative to the underlying tibia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and has been used extensively to evaluate safety of new implant designs and/or surgical techniques regarding baseplate loosening. Because RSA is a complex methodology which involves various choices that researchers make, including whether to use marker-based or model-based methods, which migration metric to report, how to relate short-term migrations to long-term risk, and how these choices impact error, the objectives of this review were to: (1) lay out a comprehensive structure illustrating the multiple components/considerations for RSA and their interrelations, (2) review components of the structure using the latest RSA literature, and (3) use the preceding review as a context for identifying future areas of study. The components to be reviewed were structured using the following topics: type of RSA, migration metrics, sources of error, studies/reports of error, stability limits, and studies of error in stability limits. Based on the current RSA literature and knowledge gaps which exist, the following future research directions were identified: (1) revising the ISO standard to require reporting of clinical measurement error (bias) and recommending use of a local baseplate coordinate system, (2) identifying the migration metric and associated threshold most predictive of baseplate loosening for individual patients, (3) creating a method for data sharing to improve individual patient diagnostics, and (4) determining an appropriate stability limit for model-based RSA for group stability and individual patient diagnostics.

Low dose CT-based spatial analysis (CTSA) to measure implant migration after ceramic hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA): A phantom study

Implant migration is a predictor of arthroplasty survivorship. It is crucial to monitor the migration of novel hip prostheses within premarket clinical investigations. RSA is the gold standard method, but requires calibrated radiographs using specialised equipment. A commercial computed tomography micromotion analysis solution is a promising alternative but is not yet available for use with monobloc ceramic implants. This study aimed to develop and validate a CT-based spatial analysis (CTSA) method for use with ceramic implants. A phantom study was undertaken to assess accuracy and precision. A ceramic hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) and 20 tantalum beads were implanted into a synthetic hip model and mounted onto a 6-degree of freedom motion stage. The hip was repeatedly scanned with a low dose CT protocol, with imposed micromovements. Data were interrogated using a semiautomated technique. The effective radiation dose for each scan was estimated to be 0.25 mSv. For the head implant, precision ranged between 0.11 and 0.28 mm for translations and 0.34°-0.42° for rotations. For the cup implant, precision ranged between 0.08 and 0.11 mm and 0.19° and 0.42°. For the head, accuracy ranged between 0.04 and 0.18 mm for translations and 0.28°-0.46° for rotations. For the cup, accuracy ranged between 0.04 and 0.08 mm and 0.17° and 0.43°. This in vitro study demonstrates that low dose CTSA of a ceramic HRA is similar in accuracy to RSA. CT is ubiquitous, and this method may be an alternative to RSA to measure prosthesis migration.

Electrochemically applied hydroxyapatite on the cementless porous surface of Bi-Metric stems reduces early migration and has a lasting effect : an efficacy trial of a randomized five-year follow-up radiostereometric study

AIMS

BoneMaster is a thin electrochemically applied hydroxyapatite (HA) coating for orthopaedic implants that is quickly resorbed during osseointegration. Early stabilization is a surrogacy marker of good survival of femoral stems. The hypothesis of this study was that a BoneMaster coating yields a fast early and lasting fixation of stems.

METHODS

A total of 53 patients were randomized to be treated using Bi-Metric cementless femoral stems with either only a porous titanium plasma-sprayed coating (P group) or a porous titanium plasma-sprayed coating with an additional BoneMaster coating (PBM group). The patients were examined with radiostereometry until five years after surgery.

RESULTS

At three months, the mean total translation (TT) was 0.95 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.22) in the P group and 0.57 mm (95% CI 0.31 to 0.83) in the PBM group (p = 0.047). From two to five years, the TT increased by a mean of 0.14 mm (95% CI 0.03 to 0.25) more in the P group than in the PBM group (p = 0.021). In osteopenic patients (n = 20), the mean TT after three months was 1.61 mm (95% CI 1.03 to 2.20) in the P group and 0.73 mm (95% CI 0.25 to 1.21) in the PBM group (p = 0.023). After 60 months, the mean TT in osteopenic patients was 1.87 mm (95% CI 1.24 to 2.50) in the P group and 0.82 mm (95% CI 0.30 to 1.33) in the PBM group (p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

There was less early and midterm migration of cementless stems with BoneMaster coating compared with those with only a porous titanium plasma-sprayed coating. Although a BoneMaster coating seems to be important for stem fixation, especially in osteopenic patients, further research is warranted. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):647-656.

Ten-year comparison of two different techniques for femoral bone cavity preparation-broaching versus compaction in patients with cementless total hip arthroplasty : a randomized radiostereometric study of 30 total hip arthroplasties in 15 patients operated bilaterally

Aims

Femoral bone preparation using compaction technique has been shown to preserve bone and improve implant fixation in animal models. No long-term clinical outcomes are available. There are no significant long-term differences between compaction and broaching techniques for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in terms of migration, clinical, and radiological outcomes.

Methods

A total of 28 patients received one-stage bilateral primary THA with cementless femoral stems (56 hips). They were randomized to compaction on one femur and broaching on the contralateral femur. Overall, 13 patients were lost to the ten-year follow-up leaving 30 hips to be evaluated in terms of stem migration (using radiostereometry), radiological changes, Harris Hip Score, Oxford Hip Score, and complications.

Results

Over a mean follow-up period of 10.6 years, the mean stem subsidence was similar between groups, with a mean of -1.20 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.28 to -0.12) in the broaching group and a mean of -0.73 mm (95% CI -1.65 to 0.20) in the compaction group (p = 0.07). The long-term migration patterns of all stems were similar. The clinical and radiological outcomes were similar between groups. There were two intraoperative fractures in the compaction group that were fixed with cable wire and healed without complications. No stems were revised.

Conclusion

Similar stem subsidence and radiological and clinical outcomes were identified after the use of compaction and broaching techniques of the femur at long-term follow-up. Only the compaction group had intraoperative periprosthetic femur fractures, but there were no long-term consequences of these.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1035–1042.