TP4.5 Precision Without Navigation: Standardized C-Arm Positioning Improves Accuracy in Periacetabular Osteotomy Surgical Model

Clicks: 12
ID: 330920
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #102 of 444 articles by views in Journal of hip preservation surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 444 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) restores coverage of developmental dysplasia of the hip, but is technically demanding, as fragment malpositioning can compromise outcomes. Previous studies demonstrated small changes in pelvic positions significantly alter projected acetabular coverage. While new navigational techniques, such as motion-capture cameras, augmented reality, and patient-specific instrumentation, are emerging, they increase costs and operative complexity. A cost-effective alternative may be intraoperative fluoroscopic alignment matched to preoperative computed tomography (CT) scanning. This study hypothesized that precise C-arm positioning (rotation and flexion/extension) would improve the capability of an experienced surgeon to visually reproduce preoperative CT-based 3D surgical PAO plans. Methods A dysplastic artificial pelvis model mounted with motion-capture tracking was used to simulate PAO and evaluate final fragment orientation. Using custom surgical planning software, 27 CT-based preoperative plans were generated around an “ideal” PAO plan determined in 3D by the surgeon (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA]: 29.3°; Tönnis angle: 0°); 11 were randomly selected for testing. An experienced PAO surgeon visually matched each plan using fluoroscopy under two conditions: (1) preset C-arm alignment, which matched the pelvic tilt and rotation of the 3D preoperative plan using a level, and (2) manual C-arm alignment. Deviations from the plans were quantified using root-mean-square error and standard deviation (RMSE,SD) for rotations, LCEA, Tönnis angle, wall coverage, and estimated range of motion (ROM). Results With matched C-arm positioning, LCEA (3.18°,2.81°), posterior wall coverage (1.17%,1.22%), total coverage (47.54 mm2,42.52 mm2), and ROM (2.15°,1.89°) were not significantly different from planned values (p>0.05). In contrast, manual C-arm alignment resulted in significant deviations from all planned values: LCEA (5.39°,1.80°), Tönnis angle (8.98°,1.45°), anterior wall coverage (5.47%,1.36%), posterior wall coverage (3.75%,0.91%), total coverage (101.39 mm2,38.65 mm2), and ROM (4.32°,1.45°) (p<0.05). Both conditions demonstrated significant rotational error relative to the plan, with inclination (3.80°,2.78° vs 3.07°,1.98°), anteversion (4.49°,1.65° vs 4.04°,1.50°), and flexion (6.36°,2.77° vs 7.95°,2.66°) (p<0.05). Conclusions Precise C-arm position matched to preoperative pelvis alignment improves the accuracy of fluoroscopic guidance in manually reproducing CT-based PAO plans. Although rotational errors persist, standardized alignment more closely achieves planned radiographic parameters, emphasizing the importance of matching pelvis alignment intraoperatively to preoperative plans.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220357682 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Cameron Baller, Nicholas J. Dunbar, James McGinley, Philip Sheedy, Alfred Mansour
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of hip preservation surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jhps/hnag043.158
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnag043.158
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.