|
Planning |
. | |
|
| ||
|
The x
ray protocol for radiologists is available on
request.
| ||
![]() | ||
|
| ||
|
|
![]() | |
|
Determination of the acetubulum implant size
and position (size to be checked on the side view), related
moves, and marking of the initial trochanter
position.
| ||
|
| ||
|
Stem
size and position assessment
Surgical x ray mark at top of greater trochanter. Size 10 or 7.5 ? | ||
![]() ![]() ![]() Click on an illustration to increase it then to close the window | ||
|
| ||
|
Planning (less than one head, red corticals by
transparency from the blue ones of the greater trochanter).
Size 10 is obviously too big, but ideal 7.5 size blocking.
The height of the blocking is determined based on the only
visible element on the side and front view: the lesser
trochanter, whose basis is projected level with the third
notch in the stem.
| ||
![]() ![]() ![]() Click on an illustration to increase it then to close the window | ||
|
| ||
![]() ![]() ![]() Click on an illustration to increase it then to close the window | ||
|
The
mark is matched with the front in relationship to the third
notch, in order to get the actual stem position, which is
different from the first estimation made on the front only
with the 7.5, above the top of the greater trochanter
(surgical x ray mark).
This
shows the different positioning of the 7.5 stem in
relationship to the front side estimation.
| ||
|
| ||
|
The
chosen 7.5 size is related by matching the height mark of
the sound and prosthesed lesser trochanter basis, providing
a direct reading of the neck size. Here, a short neck. The
planning is then completed by determining the cut angle. The
absence of medialisation can be checked against the initial
marks, in order to validate the selection of a short
neck.
| ||
![]() ![]() ![]() Click on an illustration to increase it then to close the window | ||
|
| ||