Objective:

To explore the short-term effectiveness of hip revision surgery guided by artificial intelligence preoperative planning (AIHIP) system.

Methods:

The clinical data of 22 patients (23 hips) who were admitted between June 2019 and March 2023 and met the selection criteria were retrospectively analyzed. There were 12 males and 10 females with an average age of 69.7 years (range, 44-90 years). There were 19 hips in the first revision, 3 hips in the second revision, and 1 hip in the third revision. The causes of revision included 12 hips with prosthesis loosening, 4 hips with acetabular cup loosening, 3 hips with osteolysis, 2 hips with acetabular dislocation, 1 hip with postoperative infection, and 1 hip with prosthesis wear. There were 6 hips in stage ⅡA, 9 hips in stage ⅡB, 4 hips in stage ⅡC, 3 hips in stage ⅢA, and 1 hip in stage ⅢB according to Paprosky staging of acetabular bone defect. The replacement of prosthesis type, operation time, hospitalization stay, ground active condition, and postoperative infection, fracture, prosthesis loosening, and other adverse events were recorded. The function of the affected limb was evaluated by Harris score before operation, at 1 week and 6 months after operation, and the range of motion of the hip joint was compared before operation and at 6 months after operation.

Results:

The operation time was 85-510 minutes, with an average of 241.8 minutes; the hospitalization stay was 7-35 days, with an average of 15.2 days; the time of disassociation from the walker was 2-108 days, with an average of 42.2 days. All the 22 patients were followed up 8-53 months (mean, 21.7 months). No adverse events such as prosthesis loosening or infection occurred in the rest of the patients, except for postoperative hematoma of the thigh in 1 patient and dislocation of the hip in 1 hip. The matching degree of acetabular cup was completely matched in 22 hips and mismatched in 1 hip (+2), the matching rate was 95.65%. The matching degree of femoral stem was completely matched in 22 hips and generally matched in 1 hip (-1), and the matching rate was 100%. The Harris scores were 55.3±9.8 and 89.6±7.2 at 1 week and 6 months after operation, respectively, which significantly improved when compared with before operation (33.0±8.6, P<0.05), and further improved at 6 months after operation than at 1 week after operation ( P<0.05). The function of hip joint was evaluated by Harris score at 6 months after operation, and 21 hips were good and 2 hips were moderate, which could meet the needs of daily life. The range of motion of hip joint was (111.09±10.11)° at 6 months after operation, which was significantly different from (79.13±18.50)° before operation ( t=-7.269, P<0.001).

Conclusion:

AIHIP system can improve the accuracy of revision surgery, reduce the difficulty of surgery, and achieve good postoperative recovery and satisfactory short-term effectiveness.