RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Various computer-assisted surgical systems claim to improve the accuracy of cup placement in total hip arthroplasties after assessing spinopelvic mobility to prevent prosthetic impingement. However, no study has yet analyzed the extent of the patient-specific cup anteversion safe zones. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that most patients have a safe zone >10 °, except those with abnormal spinopelvic mobility, who have a much narrower safe zone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We simulated the risks of prosthetic impingement using the planned cup anteversion. The consecutive cohort included 341 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty. Our primary endpoint was the patient-specific impingement-free zone for cup anteversion, which was then divided into four subgroups: 0 °, 1 ° to 5 °, 6 ° to 10 °, and >10 °. This data was then secondarily analyzed for abnormal spinopelvic mobility (the difference in the spinopelvic tilt [ΔSPT] from a standing to a flexed seated position >20 °). RESULTS: The mean anteversion safe zone was 22.8 ° with 82.4% (281/341) of patients with a zone strictly >10 °. The mean safe zone was 8.9 ° (+/- 9 °) in patients with an ΔSPT ≥20 ° (18.2%), with 37.1% of these patients having a zone of 0 °, 16.13% a zone between 1 ° and 5 °, 8.06% a zone between 6 ° and 10 ° and 38.71% a zone >10 °. The mean safe zone was 25.9 ° (+/- 9 °) in patients with an ΔSPT <20 ° (81.8%), and the proportion of cases in each zone was 2.51%, 1.08%, 4.3%, and 92.11%, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The safe zone for anteversion appears to be fairly wide in most patients. However, identifying patients at risk of abnormal spinopelvic mobility seems necessary to identify the two-thirds of patients with a narrow safe zone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; retrospective study.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Motion in the spine, pelvis and hips which make up the spinopelvic femoral complex (SPFC) implies mechanical relationships that help maintain trunk balance and optimize hip functionThe aim of this study was to understand the physiology of the SPFC and evaluate the dysfunctions of the SPFC and their implications for total hip arthroplasty considering the hip-spine relationship. METHODS: A review of relevant and comprehensive studies on this subject is reported in order to highlight a pathophysiology that integrates the description of the evaluations of the spine-pelvic and hip parameters and recommendations for the kinematic planning of the THA procedure. The primary objective was to determine which type of hip-spine relationship has the highest risk for THA complications and to become proficient in selecting the priority surgical intervention when both the hip and spine are affected. Finally, this review attempted to assist hip surgeons with surgical technique, tools, implant selection, and goals of planning a THA that requires personalized kinematic alignment. Determine the influence of THA on these kinematics and the effect of stiffness of the lumbopelvic complex on the risk of THA failure. RESULTS: When a person sits, the pelvis goes into retroversion and the acetabulum opens forward. This frees the femoral head and neck to allow hip flexion. The opposite - pelvic anteversion - occurs when a person stands. When pelvic mobility is limited, the hip must increase its range of motion to accommodate these posture changes. Disturbances in spinal and pelvic kinematics lead to abnormal hip function, which may contribute to complications following total hip arthroplasty (THA). CONCLUSION: A precise evaluation of the parameters governing the SPFC must be taken into account in order to best optimize the placement and choice of THA implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Patient-perceived leg length discrepancy (PLLD) is one of the major postoperative complications of total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to identify factors that cause PLLD following THA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included a series of consecutive patients who underwent unilateral THA between 2015 and 2020. Ninety-five patients who underwent unilateral THA with postoperative radiographic leg length discrepancy (RLLD) ≤1 cm were classified into two groups according to the direction of preoperative pelvic obliquity (PO). Standing radiographs of the hip joint and whole spine were obtained before and one year after THA. The clinical outcomes and the presence or absence of PLLD was confirmed one year after THA. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were classified as having type 1 PO (rising toward the unaffected side) and 26 were classified as having type 2 PO (rising toward the affected side). Eight patients with type 1 PO and seven with type 2 PO had PLLD postoperatively. In the type 1 group, patients with PLLD had larger preoperative and postoperative PO values and larger preoperative and postoperative RLLD than those without PLLD (p = 0.01, p < 0.001, p = 0.01, and p = 0.007, respectively). In the type 2 group, patients with PLLD had larger preoperative RLLD, larger amount of leg correction, and a larger preoperative L1-L5 angle than those without PLLD (p = 0.03, p = 0.03, and p = 0.03, respectively). In type 1, postoperative PO was significantly associated with postoperative PLLD (p = 0.005), but spinal alignment was not an indicator of postoperative PLLD. The area under the curve (AUC) for postoperative PO was 0.883 (good accuracy) with a cut-off value was 1.90° CONCLUSION: Rigidity of the lumbar spine might lead to postoperative PO as a compensatory movement, resulting in PLLD after THA in type 1. Further research on the relationship between flexibility of the lumbar spine and PLLD is needed.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The available classifications and preoperative planning tools for total hip arthroplasty assume that: 1) there is no variation in the sagittal pelvic tilt (SPT) if the radiographs are repeated, and 2) there is no significant change in the postoperative SPT postoperatively. We hypothesized that there would be significant differences in postoperative SPT tilt as measured by the sacral slope, thus rendering the current classifications and tools flawed. METHODS: This study was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of preoperative and postoperative (1.5-6 months) full-body imaging of 237 primary total hip arthroplasty (standing and sitting positions). Patients were categorized as 1) stiff spine (standing sacral slope sitting sacral slope < 10°) and 2) normal spine (standing sacral slope-sitting sacral slope ≥ 10°). Results were compared using the paired t-test. The posthoc power analysis showed a power of 0.99. RESULTS: The difference in mean standing and sitting sacral slope between the preoperative and postoperative measurements was 1°. However, in standing position, this difference was more than 10° in 14.4% of patients. In the sitting position, this difference was more than 10° in 34.2% of patients and more than 20° in 9.8% of patients. Postoperatively, 32.5% of patients switched groups based on the classification, which rendered the preoperative planning suggested by the current classifications flawed. CONCLUSION: Current preoperative planning and classifications are based on a single acquisition of preoperative radiographs without the incorporation of possible postoperative changes in SPT. Validated classifications and planning tools should incorporate repeated measurements to determine the mean and variance in SPT and consider the significant postoperative changes in SPT.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The hip-spine relationship is increasingly recognized as critical for optimizing stability following total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, these measurements are not routinely obtained during THA workup. It has been suggested that insight can be gained from supine antero-posterior pelvis radiograph, measuring the distance from the superior border of the pubic symphysis to the sacro-coccygeal joint (PSCD). This study assessed the correlation between PSCD and lateral lumbar radiographic metrics in a cohort of preoperative THA patients. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 250 consecutive patients who underwent THA with preoperative supine antero-posterior pelvis and lateral lumbar radiographs. The mean age was 68 years (range, 42 to 89), 61% were women, and the mean body mass index was 30 kg/m2 (range, 19 to 52). Two reviewers measured PSCD, pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), and lumbar lordosis (LL). Inter-observer reliability was calculated for all measurements, and correlation coefficients were calculated for PSCD with respect to PT, SS, PI, and LL. RESULTS: Correlations between PSCD and lumbar radiographic metrics were all statistically significant, except for PI in men but graded as "weak" or "very weak" for men and women, respectively, as follows: PT = -0.30 (P < .01) and -0.46 (P < .01); SS = 0.27 (P < .01) and 0.22 (P < .01); PI = -0.04 (P = .70) and -0.19 (P = .02); and LL = 0.45 (P < .01) and 0.30 (P < .01). Inter-observer reliability was graded as "strong" for every metric. CONCLUSION: The PSCD was weakly correlated with all evaluated lateral lumbar radiographic metrics in both sexes, despite strong inter-observer reliability. Therefore, PSCD cannot reliably serve as a proxy for evaluating the hip-spine relationship.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been described as the operation of the century. Despite significant advancement in the field of technology, hip instability remains second most common cause of revision hip surgery after infection. There is garning interest to identify role of hip-spine relationship in order to identify high-risk patients for instability after THA. Acetabular component position varies according to spinal alignment and mobility in order to decrease risk of impingement and instability. Preoperative work up includes standing pelvis anteroposterior radiograph and lateral spino-pelvic radiograph in standing and sitting position. The focus of this review is to develop an algorithm to address the spino-pelvic pathology and guide the treatment on the basis of sagittal movement of the spine-pelvis-hip complex and to minimise the rate of dislocation following THA.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Targets of acetabular inclination and anteversion have been suggested based on a patient's spinopelvic mobility. Current methods in total hip arthroplasty (THA) include manual instrumentation, computer-assisted navigation, and robotic-assisted surgery. This study aims to compare the accuracy of these 3 methods in targeting the functional safe zone. METHODS: This is a prospective multicenter study including a series of 251 consecutive primary posterior THA patients from April 2019 to January 2021. Preoperative lateral standing and sitting spinopelvic radiographs were obtained. Each patient was classified using the Hip-Spine Classification. A functional safe zone plan was determined. Surgeons used their preferred method (manual instrumentation, computer-assisted, or robotic-assisted). Postoperative anteversion and inclination was measured and compared to the preoperative plan. Mean differences between preoperative and postoperative values were calculated. Welch's t-test was used to assess significant between-group differences with P < .05 considered significant. RESULTS: Of the 249 patients, there were 63 manual instrumentation, 68 computer-assisted navigation, and 118 robotic-assisted surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery (rTHA) was significantly more accurate in targeting anteversion (1 ± 2) compared to manual instrumentation (mTHA; 7 ± 6, P < .001) and computer-assisted navigation (cTHA; 6 ± 6, P < .001). rTHA was also significantly more accurate in targeting inclination (1 ± 1) compared to mTHA (8 ± 7, P < .001) and cTHA (6 ± 7, P < .001). Although cTHA had greater accuracy in targeting both inclination and anteversion compared to mTHA, these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted surgery was more accurate than both computer-assisted navigation and manual instrumentation in targeting the functional safe zone in primary THA. Further research is needed to evaluate the effect of improved accuracy on dislocation rates.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Frequently, patients indicated for total hip arthroplasty (THA) present with low back pain (LBP) and hip pain. The purpose of this study was to compare patients whose back pain resolved after THA with those where back pain did not resolve and identify how to predict this using spinopelvic parameters. METHODS: We reviewed a series of 500 patients who underwent THA for unilateral hip osteoarthritis by 2 surgeons. Patients underwent biplanar standing and sitting EOS radiographs pre-operatively. Patients with previous spine surgery or femoral neck fracture were excluded. Demographic data was analyzed at baseline. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were calculated pre-operatively and at 1 year postoperatively. Spinopelvic parameters included, pelvic incidence and sacral slope (SS) change from standing to sitting. RESULTS: Two hundred and four patients (41%) had documented LBP before THA. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for patients improved from 38.9 ± 17.8 pre-operatively to 17.0 ± 10.6 at 1 year post-operatively (P < .001). At 1- and 2-year follow-up, resolution of back pain occurred in 168 (82.4%) and 187 (91.2%) patients, respectively. Pelvic incidence was not predictive of back pain resolution. All patients whose back pain resolved had a sacral slope change from standing to sitting of >10°, while those patients whose back pain did not resolve had a change of <10°. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that symptomatic low back pain (LBP) resolves in 82% of patients after THA. The results of this study may be used to counsel patients on back pain and its resolution following total hip replacement.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIMS: Pelvic incidence (PI) is considered an important anatomical parameter for determining the sagittal balance of the spine. The contribution of an abnormal PI to hip osteoarthritis (OA) remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between PI and hip OA, and the difference in PI between hip OA without anatomical abnormalities (primary OA) and hip OA with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH-OA). METHODS: In this study, 100 patients each of primary OA, DDH-OA, and control subjects with no history of hip disease were included. CT images were used to measure PI, sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion. PI was also subdivided into three categories: high PI (larger than 64.0°), medium PI (42.0° to 64.0°), and low PI (less than 42.0°). The anterior centre edge angles, posterior centre edge angles, and total sagittal femoral head coverage were measured. The correlations between PI and sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion were examined. RESULTS: No significant difference in PI was observed between the three groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the category distribution of PI. The DDH-OA group had lower mean sagittal femoral head coverage than the other groups. There were no significant correlations between PI and other anatomical factors, including sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion. CONCLUSION: No associations were found between mean PI values or PI categories and hip OA. Furthermore, there was no difference in PI between patients with primary OA and DDH-OA. From our evaluation, we found no evidence of PI being an independent factor associated with the development of hip OA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1656-1661.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Hip length discrepancy (HLD) is common after total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, the effect of spinal fusion on perceived leg length discrepancy (LLD) symptoms after THA has not been examined. This study tested the hypothesis that LLD symptoms are increased in patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion and THA, compared with patients with THA only. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 67 patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion and THA, along with 78 matched control patients who underwent THA only. Hip and spine measurements were taken on postoperative, standing anterior-posterior pelvic, lateral lumbar, and anterior-posterior lumbar spinal radiographs. Perceived LLD symptoms were assessed via telephone survey. RESULTS: Between the spinal fusion and control groups, there was no significant difference in HLD (M = 7.10 mm, SE = 0.70 and M = 5.60 mm, SE = 0.49) (P = .403). The spinal fusion patients reported more frequently noticing a difference in the length of their legs than the control group (P = .046) and reported limping "all the time" compared with the control group (P = .001). Among all patients with an HLD ≤10 mm, those in the spinal fusion group reported limping at a higher frequency than patients in the control group (P = .008). Patients in the spinal fusion group were also more likely to report worsened back pain after THA (P = .011) than the control group. CONCLUSION: Frequencies of a perceived LLD, limping, and worsened back pain after THA were increased in patients with THA and a spinal fusion compared with patients who had THA only, even in a population with HLD traditionally considered to be subclinical. The results indicate that in patients with prior spinal fusion, precautions should be taken to avoid even minor LLD in the setting of THA.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Understanding spinopelvic motion and the dynamic relationship of the hip, spine, and pelvis is essential in decreasing the risk of instability after total hip arthroplasty. The hip-spine relationship is complex, and a detailed analysis of each patient's spinopelvic mobility is warranted to help guide safe acetabular component positioning. Through the use of a standing anteroposterior pelvis X-ray, lateral spinopelvic radiographs in the standing and seated position, and advanced functional imaging, key spinopelvic parameters can be obtained. A systematic preoperative workup can help to identify hip-spine pathology that predisposes patients to instability, and can help in planning and establishing a patient-specific "safe zone." Based on the presence of concomitant hip-spine pathology, patients must be evaluated thoroughly with preoperative imaging to plan for the optimal target acetabular cup position. This paper guides readers through important parameters and imaging associated to spinopelvic motion as it relates to total hip arthroplasty stability.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patients with spinopelvic pathology, including lumbar spine stiffness and sagittal spinal deformity, are at increased risk for postoperative complications, including instability, dislocation, and revision after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Recent evidence has suggested that the Lewinnek safe zone should no longer be considered an appropriate target for all patients, especially those with spinopelvic pathology, as the safe zone is a dynamic rather than static target. There are 2 distinct issues for arthroplasty surgeons to consider: lumbar spinal stiffness and sagittal spinal deformity, each of which has its own management. METHODS: In order to manage patients with spinopelvic pathology undergoing THA, a basic understanding of spinopelvic parameters, including sagittal balance, sacral slope, and anterior pelvic plane, is essential. Techniques outlined in this manuscript describe a systematic preoperative work-up and intraoperative management of acetabular component positioning according to patient-specific spinopelvic parameters, ensuring optimal component placement and a reduced risk for impingement, instability, and poor postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Evaluation of each patient's spinopelvic parameters informs patient classification according to the Hip-Spine Classification for THA. Patient classification is determined by the presence of spinal stiffness and spinal deformity, with corresponding scoring and classification into one of the 4 categories used to determine risk for postoperative dislocation, define patient-specific cup positioning, and create their functional safe zone. CONCLUSION: A simple 2-step preoperative assessment with measurements of the anterior pelvic plane and the sacral slope on standing and seated lateral X-rays will identify patients at high risk for postoperative dislocation due to spinal deformity and/or stiffness. Accounting for spinopelvic pathology and adhering to the Hip-Spine Classification guidelines for acetabular component positioning can help reduce the burden of instability and revisions in this complex patient population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Total hip arthroplasty dislocations that occur inside Lewinnek's anatomical safe zone represent a need to better understand the hip-spine relationship. Unfortunately, the use of obtuse and redundant terminology to describe the hip-spine relationship has made it a relatively inaccessible topic in orthopaedics. However, with a few basic definitions and principles, the hip-spine relationship can be simplified and understood to prevent unnecessary dislocations following total hip arthroplasty.In the following text, we use common language to define a normal and abnormal hip-spine relationship, present an algorithm for recognising and treating a high-risk hip-spine patient, and discuss several common, high-risk hip-spine pathologies to apply these concepts. Simply, high-risk hip-spine patients often require subtle adjustments to acetabular anteversion based on radiographic evaluations and should also be considered for a high-offset stem, dual-mobility articulation, or large femoral head for additional protection against instability and dislocation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A large body of evidence has confirmed that patients with spinal deformity, lumbar fusion, and abnormal spinopelvic mobility are at significantly increased risk for instability, dislocation, and revision after total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: Achieving a stable construct in patients with pre-existing spine disease requires an understanding of basic spinopelvic parameters and the compensatory mechanisms associated with abnormal spinopelvic motion. Indicated patients with concomitant hip-spine pathology should be assessed for (1) the presence of spinal deformity and (2) the presence of spinal stiffness before undergoing THA. Preoperative imaging should include a standing anteroposterior pelvis x-ray, as well as two lateral spinopelvic radiographs in the standing and seated position. RESULTS: Based on the presence of spinal deformity and/or spinal stiffness, patients may be categorized as one of the four groups of the "Hip-Spine Classification in THA." A series of illustrative case examples is provided. CONCLUSION: A simple three-step assessment with minimal measurements will effectively identify the complex "hip-spine" THA patient at high risk for postoperative instability. Adhering to group-specific recommendations for acetabular cup position can help to further reduce the burden of instability and related revisions in this challenging population.

Asunto(s)