Hip resurfacing is an alternative to total hip replacement (THR) and is particularly suitable for the younger, more active patient. However, it is a more demanding procedure. This paper describes a system that enables the surgeon to plan the surgery preoperatively with optimally sized and placed components, and then transfer this plan to an intraoperative system that registers computer models to the real patient and tracks surgical tools, allowing the surgeon to ensure that the bone is resected correctly and that the components are fitted in accordance with the plan. The paper describes a series of instruments used with the system which are locked to the bone. These instruments serve the dual purpose of soft tissue retraction and bone immobilization. The system will shortly be the subject of laboratory and clinical evaluation. Registration, a cornerstone of the tracked instrument system, has been tested, and accuracy measures are provided. Experimental results for the remainder of the system will be provided after clinical trials.
CallaghanJ. J.ForestE. E.SporerS. M.GoetzD. D.JohnstonR. C.Total hip arthro-plasty in the young adultClin. Orthop., 1997, 344, 257–262.
2.
ChandlerH. P.ReineckF. T.WixsonR. L.McCarthyJ. C.Total hip replacement in patients younger than thirty years oldJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Am.), 1981, 63A, 1426–1434.
3.
DorrD. L.KaneJ. T.IIIConatyP.Long-term results of cemented total hip arthroplasty in patients 45 years old or youngerJ. Arthroplasty, 1994, 9, 453–456.
4.
JoshiA. B.PorterM. L.TrailI. A.HuntL. P.MurphyJ. C.HardingeK.Long-term results of Charnley low-friction arthroplasty in young patientsJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Br.), 1993, 75, 616–623.
5.
DanielJ.PynsentP. B.McMinnD. J.Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritisJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Br.), 2004, 86, 177–184.
6.
McMinnD.TreacyR.LinK.PynsentP.Metal on metal surface replacement of the hip. Experience of the McMinn prosthesisClin. Orthop., 1996, 329 (Suppl.), S89–98.
7.
BeauleP. E.AmstutzH. C.Le DuffM.DoreyF.Surface arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the hip: Hemiresurfacing versus metal-on-metal hybrid resurfacingJ. Arthroplasty, 2004, 19 (8, Suppl. 3), 54–58.
8.
BerryD. J.BergerR. A.CallaghanJ. J.DorrL. D.DuweliusP. J.HartzbandM. A.LiebermanJ. R.MearsD. C.Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. Development, early results, and a critical analysisJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Am.), 2003, 85A, 2235–2246.
9.
BergerR. A.Total hip arthroplasty using the minimally invasive two-incision approachClin. Orthop., 2003, 417, 232–241.
10.
BergerR. A.JacobsJ. J.MeneghiniR. M.Della ValleC.PaproskyW.RosenbergA. G.Rapid rehabilitation and recovery with minimally invasive total hip arthroplastyClin. Orthop., 2004, 429, 239–247.
11.
HungerfordD. S.Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: In oppositionJ. Arthroplasty, 2004, 19 (4, Suppl. 1), 81–82.
12.
FehringT. K.MasonJ. B.Catastrophic complications of minimally invasive hip surgery. A series of three casesJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Am.), 2005, 87 (4), 711–714.
13.
ShimminA. J.BackD.Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacingJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Br.), 2004, 87, 463–464.
14.
ShimminA. J.BareJ.BackD. L.Complications associated with hip resurfacing arthroplastyOrthop. Clin. North Am., 2005, 36, 187–193.
15.
HarrisS. J.BarrettA. R. W.JakopecM.DandachliW.CobbJ. P.DaviesB. L.Computer assisted planning for hip resurfacing replacement surgery. Proceedings of 5th CAOS 2005, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 155–157.
16.
LorensenW. E.ClineH. E.Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface construction algorithmComp. Graphics (Proc. SIGGRAPH), 1987, 21, 163–169.
17.
KingsleyP. C.OlmstedK. L.A study to determine the angle of anteversion of the neck of the femurJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Am.), 1948, 30, 745–751.
18.
MurphyS. B.SimonS. R.KijewskiP. K.WilkinsonR. H.GriscomN. T.Femoral anteversionJ. Bone Jt Surg. (Am.), 1987, 69, 1169–1176.
19.
DandachliW.RichardsR.HarrisS. J.BarrettA. R. W.DaviesB. L.CobbJ. P.A practical reference coordinate system for planning hip resurfacing surgery. Proceedings of 5th CAOS 2005, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 78–80.
20.
21.
BarrettA. R. W.CobbJ. P.JakopecM.HarrisS. J.Rodriguez y BaenaF. M.DaviesB. L.The tubes for minimally invasive computer-assisted hip resurfacing surgery. Proceedings of 5th CAOS 2005, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 22–24.
22.
WatsonS. J.JonesA. L.OatwayW. B.HughesJ. S.Ionising radiation exposure of the UK population: 2005 review. Health Protection Agency - Radiation Protection Division, 2005, HPA-RPD-001.
23.
JollesB. M.GenoudP.HoffmeyerP.Computer-assisted cup placement techniques in total hip arthroplasty improve accuracy of placementClin. Orthop., 2004, 426, 174–179.
24.
HenckelJ.CobbJ. P.RichardsR.HarrisS. J.JakopecM.Rodriguez y BaenaF. M.BarrettA. R. W.DaviesB. L.Computer assisted arthroplasty; appropriate imaging for assessment of implant position. Proceedings of 4th CAOS 2004, Chicago, Illinois, pp. 16–19.
25.
HenckelJ.CobbJ. PHarrisS. J.JakopecM.Rodriguez y BaenaF. M.DaviesB. L.Accuracy in arthroplasty: a 3 dimensional CT based measurement study. Proceedings of 5th CAOS 2005, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 165–167.
