PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 17, 2026International Orthopaedics2 citationsOpen Access

Accuracy of two different imageless navigation systems for leg length and global offset change in total hip arthroplasty: A comparison using two-dimensional radiographic and three-dimensional CT-based evaluation

STShine ToneYNYohei NaitoGKGai Kobayashi

Key Points

  • This study aims to assess the accuracy of two imageless navigation systems in restoring leg length and global offset changes during total hip arthroplasty.
  • Patients undergoing primary cementless total hip arthroplasty were divided into two groups based on the navigation system: large-console (n=120) and portable handheld (n=83).
  • Intraoperative navigation measurements of leg length change and global offset change were compared with preoperative and postoperative assessments.
  • Accuracy was evaluated using both 2D radiographic and 3D CT-based measurements.
  • The large-console group showed an absolute leg length change error of 2.5 mm on 3D CT evaluation, significantly lower than the handheld group's 3.0 mm error (p=0.004).
  • Absolute global offset change error did not significantly differ between groups.
  • No differences were noted for leg length change between 2D and 3D evaluations, whereas global offset parameters showed significant discrepancies.

Abstract

Abstract Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of two imageless navigation systems for restoring leg length change (LLC) and global offset change (GOC) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) using two-dimensional (2D) radiographic and three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT)-based assessment methods. Methods Patients undergoing primary cementless THA were divided into two groups based on the imageless navigation system used: a large-console group ( n = 120) and a portable handheld group ( n = 83). Intraoperative navigation measurements of the LLC and GOC were compared with values derived from preoperative and postoperative assessments, and absolute measurement errors were calculated. Accuracy was evaluated using 2D radiographic and 3D CT-based measurements. Between-system differences and discrepancies between 2 and 3D assessment methods were analyzed. Results Absolute LLC error in the large-console group was 2.7 ± 3.3 mm on 2D radiographic evaluation and 2.5 ± 3.3 mm on 3D CT-based evaluation, compared with 2.9 ± 2.7 mm and 3.0 ± 2.8 mm, respectively, in the portable handheld group. LLC error was significantly lower in the large-console group on 3D evaluation (p = 0.004). Absolute GOC error did not differ significantly between groups. No differences were observed between 2 and 3D evaluations for LLC, whereas most GOC-related parameters differed significantly between methods. Conclusion Imageless navigation systems achieved favorable accuracy for LLC and GOC in THA. While radiographic assessment is sufficient for evaluating leg length, 3D CT-based evaluation provides a more consistent and less position-dependent assessment of global offset.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Tone et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a095b8e7880e6d24efe1634https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-026-06849-5
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper