RESEARCH ARTICLE
Minimal Increase in Total Hip Arthroplasty Surgical Procedural Time with the Use of a Novel Surgical Navigation Tool
Alexander Christ1, Danielle Ponzio1, Michael Pitta1, Kaitlin Carroll1, Jeffrey M. Muir2, *, Peter K. Sculco1
Article Information
Identifiers and Pagination:
Year: 2018Volume: 12
First Page: 389
Last Page: 395
Publisher ID: TOORTHJ-12-389
DOI: 10.2174/1874325001812010389
Article History:
Received Date: 15/5/2018Revision Received Date: 5/9/2018
Acceptance Date: 7/9/2018
Electronic publication date: 28/09/2018
Collection year: 2018
open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Abstract
Background:
Computer-assisted navigation has proven effective at improving the accuracy of component placement during Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA); however, the material costs, line-of-site issues and potential for significant time increases have limited their widespread use.
Objective:
The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of an imageless navigation device on surgical time, when compared with standard mechanical guides.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from 61 consecutive primary unilateral THA cases (posterior approach) performed by a single surgeon. Procedural time (incision to closure) for THA performed with (intervention) or without (control) a computer-assisted navigation system was compared. In the intervention group, the additional time associated with the use of the device was recorded. Mean times were compared using independent samples t-tests with statistical significance set a priori at p<0.05.
Results:
There was no statistically significant difference between procedural time in the intervention and control groups (102.3±28.3 mins vs. 99.1±14.7 mins, p=0.60). The installation and use of the navigation device accounted for an average of 2.9 mins (SD: 1.6) per procedure, of which device-related setup performed prior to skin incision accounted for 1.1 mins (SD: 1.1) and intra-operative tasks accounted for 1.6 mins (SD: 1.2).
Conclusion:
In this series of 61 consecutive THAs performed by a single surgeon, the set-up and hands-on utilization of a novel surgical navigation tool required an additional 2.9 minutes per case. We suggest that the intraoperative benefits of this novel computer-assisted navigation platform outweigh the minimal operative time spent using this technology.
