Discrepancy between penetration depths derived from radiographic and direct measurement of acetabular components

The most common technique for assessing penetration due to wear in acetabular components is with the aid of the most recent serial radiograph. This approach, which is often termed the uni-radiographic method, has been shown to underestimate the more reliable value of the penetration depth deduced from direct measurement of explanted sockets. In this article the causes of the discrepancies between the two data sets are explored. Ninety-six sockets were available from revision surgery for which both the penetration depth and angle could be measured using the shadowgraphic technique in both the coronal and wear planes. Further, the penetration depth for each of the sockets was also assessed from pre-revision X-rays. A significant discrepancy was observed between the penetration depths measured in the wear plane of the replica delta Pw and that measured from the radiograph, delta PX-ray. The discrepancy was greatest for loose sockets as opposed to those that were still fixed at revision surgery. Using the corresponding data from the shadowgraph measurements, it was possible to deduce that the errors have arisen from the radiographic measurement of wear in the coronal plane and the formula used in calculating delta PX-ray. If these errors (which cannot be calculated from the X-ray data alone) were taken into consideration, then the systematic bias between radiographic and shadowgraphic measurement was greatly reduced. The largest portion of the discrepancy was accounted for by wear occurring out of the plane of the radiograph, and this, in general, coincides with the coronal plane. Overall, these results indicate that the accurate measurement of wear from serial radiographs is not possible and that improved performance in terms of accuracy can only be achieved when a three-dimensional system is used. An alternative method for deducing the radiographic penetration depth is proposed which, theoretically, negates the error arising from the inaccuracy of the formula.