ABSTRACT
Background: An important aspect of preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty is templating. Although two-dimensional (2D) templating remains the gold standard, computerized tomography (CT)-based three-dimensional (3D) templating is a novel preoperative planning technique. This study aims to compare the accuracy of a 2D and 3D plan using an anterior approach for the placement of the same uncemented prosthesis. Methods: Two consecutive cohorts of 100 patients each were retrospectively analyzed. We analyzed the accuracy of the size of the implant (stem, cup, head), the length of head, and offset. As a secondary criterion, we analyzed the rates of stems with more than 3° of varus, fracture, and/or subsidence at 3 months postoperatively. Results: Within the exact size, the accuracy of the stem and cup size with the 2D plan was 69% and 56%, respectively. With the 3D plan accuracy being 88% (P = .0046) and 96% (P < .0001), respectively. Regarding size and length of the implant head, accuracy was 86% and 82% with the 2D plan and 100% (P < .0001) and 94% (P = .016), respectively, with the 3D plan. The offset of the implants increased beyond 3 mm in 23% of patients in the 2D group and in 5% of patients in the 3D group (P = .0003). The rate of varus stems was 10% in the 2D group and 2% in the 3D group (P = .03). Two fractures and one case of subsidence occurred in the 2D group. None were identified in the 3D cohort. Conclusions: A CT-based 3D plan is more accurate for implant size selection, allows better prosthetic offset, and reduces the rate of varus stems.
ABSTRACT
An emerging issue for orthopedic surgeons is how to manage patients with active or previous COVID-19 disease, avoiding any major risks for the surgeons and the O.R. personnel. This monocentric prospective observational study aims to assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 viral RT-PCR RNA in cancellous bone samples in patients with active or previous COVID-19 disease. We collected data about 30 consecutive patients from our institution from January 2021 to March 2021 with active or previous COVID-19 disease. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the samples was determined using two different PCR-based assays. Eighteen of the thirty patients included in the study had a positive nasopharyngeal swab at the time of surgery. Twelve patients had a negative nasopharyngeal swab with a mean days since negativization of 138 ± 104 days, ranging from 23 to 331 days. Mean days of positivity to the nasal swab were 17 ± 17. Twenty-nine out of thirty (96.7%) samples were negative for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. In one sample, low SARS-CoV-2 load (Cycle threshold (Ct) 36.6.) was detected but not confirmed using an additional confirmatory assay. The conducted study demonstrates the absence of the viral genome within the analyzed cancellous bone. We think that the use of personal protection equipment (PPE) to only protect from aerosol produced during surgery, both in active and recovered patients, is not strictly necessary. We think that the use of PPE should not be employed by surgeons and the O.R. personnel to protect themselves from aerosols produced from the respiratory tract. Moreover, we think that our results could represent a valid basis for further studies related to the possibility of bone donation in patients that suffered and recovered from COVID-19.
