Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up and Sub-Analysis of Navigation vs Non-Navigation for Hip Resurfacing.

Background: The purpose of this study was to report the short-term clinical outcomes of hip resurfacing with navigation and the impact on accuracy of acetabular implant placement in both the frontal and sagittal planes.

Materials and methods: Data were retrospectively analyzed for patients who received hip resurfacing between 2010 and 2021. Eligible patients had postoperative radiographs and completed a minimum 2-year follow-up questionnaire for the following patient-reported outcomes: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Harris Hip Score (HHS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), visual analog scale (VAS) score, satisfaction, and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (HOOS-JR). Hips were propensity matched in a 1:1 ratio based on the use of navigation, age, and body mass index. The percentage of hips that met the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for mHHS and VAS score was noted. Component placement analysis was conducted based on the safe zones defined by Lewinnek and Callanan and the Relative Acetabular Inclination Limit.

Results: Seventy-six hips were matched, 38 per group. No differences were observed in patient-reported outcomes or the percentage of hips reaching MCID between the groups. The navigation group was 28.8 and 6.8 times more likely to be within the Callanan and Lewinnek safe zones, respectively. Based on the Relative Acetabular Inclination Limit, the navigation group was 3.1 and 6.4 times more likely to be within the 95% and 99% CI safe zones, respectively.

Conclusion: Comparable improvements in patient-reported outcomes were observed in the two groups during a minimum 2-year follow-up. Navigation-assisted surgery enhances the accuracy of acetabular component positioning, with a higher likelihood of cup placement within the safe zones. [Orthopedics. 202x;4x(x):xx-xx.].