Search

Purpose: Although many factors were suggested to affect acetabular cup positioning during primary total hip arthroplasty, the effect of surgeon handedness was rarely evaluated. We aimed primarily to assess the difference in cup positioning (inclination and anteversion) between the right and left sides during primary THA. Secondly, to check the difference in the percentages of cups positioned in the safe zone for inclination and anteversion and if there will be a difference in cup positioning according to the type of cup fixation (cemented vs. cementless). Methods: Cup inclination and anteversion of 420 THAs were radiographically evaluated retrospectively. THAs were performed by a senior right-handed surgeon, who operated through a direct lateral approach in a lateral decubitus position using manual instruments and freehand technique for cup placement. Patients were assigned to two groups: Group A (right, or dominant side), and Group B (left, or non-dominant side), with equal cases of THAs (n = 210) in each group. Results: No difference was found in patients' basic characteristics, preoperative diagnosis, and cup fixation (54.3% cemented and 45.7% cementless) between the two groups. There was a significant difference in cup inclination between Groups A and Group B (40.1° ± 6.3° vs. 38.2° ± 6.1°) (P = 0.002). No significant difference was revealed in anteversion between the two groups (11.7° ± 4.4° vs. 11.8° ± 4.7°) (P = 0.95). The percentage of cups located within the safe zone in terms of both inclination and anteversion was 85.2% vs. 83.8% and 69% vs. 73.3% for Group A and Group B, according to Lewinnek and Callahan's safe zones, respectively. There existed a significant difference in the cemented cup inclination between Group A and Group B (40.8° ± 6.4° vs. 38.3° ± 6.3°) (P = 0.004). Conclusion: Cup inclination is affected by the surgeon's handedness when operating through a direct lateral approach and using a freehand technique, while anteversion is less affected. Furthermore, the difference is greater with cemented cups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim was to investigate the effect of surgeon handedness on acetabular cup positioning, functional outcomes, and dislocation incidence during primary THA. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies published in English were searched in three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus). A dominant side is a right-handed (RHD) or left-handed (LHD) surgeon who operates on the right or left hip, respectively. The opposite is considered to be the non-dominant side. We used odds ratios for dichotomous data and mean differences for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals for quantitative data synthesis. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² test, with outcomes graphically represented in a forest plot and a p-value of < 0.05 considered statistically significant; analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4 (RevMan 5.4.1). >. Result: Four observational studies were included out of 98 articles. Ten experienced surgeons participated (8 RHD and 2 LHD) and operated on 822 patients (1484 hips), divided equally between dominant and non-dominant sides, and the posterolateral approach was utilized in 80.9% of THAs. RHD surgeons operated on 1404 (94.6%) THAs. The pooled synthesis for inclination indicated no significant difference between either side [MD: 0.10 (95% CI -2.10 to 2.30, P = 0.93, I² = 91%)]. While the difference was significant for anteversion [MD: -2.37 (95% CI -3.82 to -0.93, P = 0.001, I² = 31%)]. The functional outcome was better on the dominant side [MD: 1.44 (95% CI 0.41 to 2.48, P = 0.006, I² = 0%)], and the dislocation incidence was significantly higher on the non-dominant side [OR: 0.45 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.81, P = 0.008, I² = 0%)]. Conclusion: Surgeon handedness and whether operating on the dominant or non-dominant side could affect the acetabular cup positioning and outcomes during primary THAs, even in the hands of high-volume surgeons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Purpose Although many factors were suggested to affect acetabular cup positioning during primary total hip arthroplasty, the effect of surgeon handedness was rarely evaluated. We aimed primarily to assess the difference in cup positioning (inclination and anteversion) between the right and left sides during primary THA. Secondly, to check the difference in the percentages of cups positioned in the safe zone for inclination and anteversion and if there will be a difference in cup positioning according to the type of cup fixation (cemented vs. cementless). Methods Cup inclination and anteversion of 420 THAs were radiographically evaluated retrospectively. THAs were performed by a senior right-handed surgeon, who operated through a direct lateral approach in a lateral decubitus position using manual instruments and freehand technique for cup placement. Patients were assigned to two groups: Group A (right, or dominant side), and Group B (left, or non-dominant side), with equal cases of THAs (n = 210) in each group. Results No difference was found in patients’ basic characteristics, preoperative diagnosis, and cup fixation (54.3% cemented and 45.7% cementless) between the two groups. There was a significant difference in cup inclination between Groups A and Group B (40.1° ± 6.3° vs. 38.2° ± 6.1°) (P = 0.002). No significant difference was revealed in anteversion between the two groups (11.7° ± 4.4° vs. 11.8° ± 4.7°) (P = 0.95). The percentage of cups located within the safe zone in terms of both inclination and anteversion was 85.2% vs. 83.8% and 69% vs. 73.3% for Group A and Group B, according to Lewinnek and Callahan’s safe zones, respectively. There existed a significant difference in the cemented cup inclination between Group A and Group B (40.8° ± 6.4° vs. 38.3° ± 6.3°) (P = 0.004). Conclusion Cup inclination is affected by the surgeon’s handedness when operating through a direct lateral approach and using a freehand technique, while anteversion is less affected. Furthermore, the difference is greater with cemented cups.

Abstract Purpose The aim was to investigate the effect of surgeon handedness on acetabular cup positioning, functional outcomes, and dislocation incidence during primary THA. Methods A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies published in English were searched in three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus). A dominant side is a right-handed (RHD) or left-handed (LHD) surgeon who operates on the right or left hip, respectively. The opposite is considered to be the non-dominant side. We used odds ratios for dichotomous data and mean differences for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals for quantitative data synthesis. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² test, with outcomes graphically represented in a forest plot and a p-value of . Result Four observational studies were included out of 98 articles. Ten experienced surgeons participated (8 RHD and 2 LHD) and operated on 822 patients (1484 hips), divided equally between dominant and non-dominant sides, and the posterolateral approach was utilized in 80.9% of THAs. RHD surgeons operated on 1404 (94.6%) THAs. The pooled synthesis for inclination indicated no significant difference between either side [MD: 0.10 (95% CI -2.10 to 2.30, P = 0.93, I² = 91%)]. While the difference was significant for anteversion [MD: -2.37 (95% CI -3.82 to -0.93, P = 0.001, I² = 31%)]. The functional outcome was better on the dominant side [MD: 1.44 (95% CI 0.41 to 2.48, P = 0.006, I² = 0%)], and the dislocation incidence was significantly higher on the non-dominant side [OR: 0.45 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.81, P = 0.008, I² = 0%)]. Conclusion Surgeon handedness and whether operating on the dominant or non-dominant side could affect the acetabular cup positioning and outcomes during primary THAs, even in the hands of high-volume surgeons.

Being one of the most successful surgeries in the history of medicine, the indications for total hip arthroplasty have widened and are increasingly being offered to younger and fitter patients. This has also led to high expectations for longevity and outcomes. Acetabular cup position has a significant impact on the results of hip arthroplasty as it affects dislocation, abductor muscle strength, gait, limb lengths, impingement, noise generation, range of motion (ROM), wear, loosening, and cup failure. The variables in cup position are depth, height, and angular position (anteversion and inclination). The implications of change in depth of center of rotation (COR) are medialized versus anatomical positioning. As opposed to traditional medialization with beneficial effects on joint reaction force, the advantages of an anatomical position are increasingly recognized. The maintained acetabular offset offers advantages in terms of ROM, impingement, cortical rim press fit, and maintaining medial bone stock. The height of COR influences muscle activity and limb lengths and available bone stock for cup support. On the other hand, ideal angular position remains a matter of much debate and reliably achieving a target angular position remains elusive. This is not helped by variations in the way we describe angular position, with operative, radiologic, or anatomic definitions being used variably to describe anteversion and inclination. Furthermore, pelvic tilt plays a major role in functional positions of the acetabulum. In addition, commonly used techniques of positioning often do not inform us of the real orientation of the pelvis on operating table, with possibility of significant adduction, flexion, and external rotation of the pelvis being possibilities. This review article brings together the evidence on cup positioning and aims to provide a systematic and pragmatic approach in achieving the best position in individual cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]