Search

Purpose: The purpose of this review is to evaluate the current status of research on the application of artificial intelligence (AI)-based three-dimensional (3D) templating in preoperative planning of total joint arthroplasty., Methods: This scoping review followed the PRISMA, PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and five stage methodological framework for scoping reviews. Studies of patients undergoing primary or revision joint arthroplasty surgery that utilised AI-based 3D templating for surgical planning were included. Outcome measures included dataset and model development characteristics, AI performance metrics, and time performance. After AI-based 3D planning, the accuracy of component size and placement estimation and postoperative outcome data were collected., Results: Nine studies satisfied inclusion criteria including a focus on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based AI templating for use in hip or knee arthroplasty. AI-based 3D templating systems reduced surgical planning time and improved implant size/position and imaging feature estimation compared to conventional radiographic templating. Several components of data processing and model development and testing were insufficiently covered in the studies included in this scoping review., Conclusions: AI-based 3D templating systems have the potential to improve preoperative planning for joint arthroplasty surgery. This technology offers more accurate and personalized preoperative planning, which has potential to improve functional outcomes for patients. However, deficiencies in several key areas, including data handling, model development, and testing, can potentially hinder the reproducibility and reliability of the methods proposed. As such, further research is needed to definitively evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of these systems., (© 2024. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to SICOT aisbl.)

Introduction: Computed tomography-based three-dimensional models may allow the accurate determination of the center of rotation, lateral and anterior femoral offsets, and the required implant size in total hip arthroplasty. In this cadaver study, the accuracy of anatomical reconstruction was evaluated using a three-dimensional planning tool., Materials and Methods: A total of eight hip arthroplasties were performed on four bilateral specimens. Based on a computed tomography scan, the position and size of the prosthesis were templated with respect to the anatomical conditions., Results: On average, all parameters were reconstructed to an accuracy of 4.5 mm and lie within the limits recommended in the literature. All prostheses were implanted with the templated size., Conclusions: The exact anatomy of the patient and the required size and position of the prosthesis were precisely analyzed using a templating software. Based on the present findings, the development of template-directed instrumentation is conceivable using this method. However, further technical features (e.g., navigation or robot-assisted surgery) are required for improved precision for implant positioning.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of preoperative templating in total hip arthroplasty (THA) using conventional 2-dimensional (2D) and computed tomography (CT)-based 3-dimensional (3D) measures., Methods: One hundred and sixteen consecutive primary THAs were analysed. The preoperative diagnosis was primary osteoarthritis in all cases. The 2D templating and the 3D templating were performed by two different residents. All templating results were available for the orthopaedic surgeon performing the procedure. Accuracies with regard to the predicted and actual implant sizes were determined for each procedure. Implantation of the size as planned was defined as "exact", whereas the use of components within one size larger or smaller (±1) as planned were defined as "accurate.", Results: The 3D templating was significantly more accurate in predicting implant sizing compared to 2D templating for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). The difference was statistically significant for the cup templating (''exact'' p = 0.02; ''accurate'' p = 0.01) and for the stem templating (''exact'' p = 0.04; ''accurate'' p = 0.01)., Conclusion: Our results support the superiority of 3D templating over 2D templating in predicting implant size.