Search

Introduction: To date the aetiology of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is still not completely understood. There are mechanical theories that suggest symptomatic FAI is linked to sagittal pelvic morphology and spinopelvic-femoral dynamics. The aim of this study is to evaluate the relation of sagittal pelvic morphology and orientation to radiographic signs of FAI. Additionally, we test whether the relation between FAI and spinopelvic parameters differs in osteoarthritic hips. Methods: From a prospective, observational cohort study, 1002 patients between 45 and 65 years old with a first episode of knee or hip pain were followed for 8 years. All patients who had lateral lumbar radiographs and clinical and radiographic follow-up of the hips were included in the present study. Range of internal rotation of the hip as well as radiographic signs of FAI (alpha and Wiberg angle) and presence of hip osteoarthritis (Kellgren and Lawrence) were systematically measured at baseline. Pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS)) were measured at 8-year follow-up. Associations between PI, PT, SS and FAI parameters were tested using generalised estimating equations. Results: 421 subjects, 842 hips, were included. No significant relations between PI, PT or SS and alpha or Wiberg angle were found. Comparison of hips with and without radiological sign(s) of FAI showed no differences in PI, PT or SS. There was no relation between range of internal rotation of the hip and spinopelvic parameters. Conclusion: Sagittal pelvic morphology and orientation are not related to the presence of radiological signs of FAI in this study population., Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository 'You share, we take care!' - Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public., Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics

Femoral component orientation plays a key role in implant stability and therefore the success rate of total hip arthroplasty. To date, this topic has been studied using various definitions and a variety of imaging modalities and protocols. The aim of this study is a proof of concept that a new algorithm can be used to describe the femoral component's 3D orientation on the three orthogonal anatomical planes and relative to its mechanical axis using input from two orthogonal planes. CT scans of 18 patients with a total of 22 hip arthroplasties were collected. From these, orthogonal coronal and sagittal projections of the complete femur were acquired in the scanning position (MIPs) and relative to the femoral mechanical axis (corrected MIPs). On these images, the orientation of the neck of the femoral component in space and relative to the femoral axis, respectively, was measured by coronal inclination (CIF), sagittal inclination (SIF) and transverse version (TVF). With the algorithm, TVF was also calculated based on CIF and SIF. Differences between measured and calculated TVF and intra- and inter-observer reliability were evaluated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). The error of non-orthogonal imaging (85° angle between the sagittal and coronal reconstructions) was tested on a third series of MIPs. The ICC between the calculated TVF and manually measured TVF, in space and relative to the femoral axis, was 0.98 for both with median absolute differences of 1.3 and 1.5°. For non-orthogonal images this was 0.70 with a median absolute difference of 5°. ICCs for intra-observer and inter-observer reliability for the calculated TVF values were 0.98 and 0.88, respectively. With this algorithm the transverse orientation of the neck of the femoral component can be assessed in space and relative to the mechanical femoral axis by combining its sagittal and coronal orientation. As long as the imaging visualizes two orthogonal planes, the orientation of an implant, Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics

Introduction: Dislocation remains a major complication in total hip arthroplasty (THA), in which femoral component orientation is considered a key parameter. New imaging modalities and definitions on femoral component orientation have been introduced, describing orientation in different planes. This study aims to systematically review the relevance of the different orientation parameters on implant stability. Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines to identify articles in the PubMed and EMBASE databases that study the relation between any femoral component orientation parameters and implant stability in primary THA. Results: After screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria and quality assessment, nine articles were included. Definitions to describe the femoral component orientation and methodologies to assess its relevance for implant stability differed greatly, with lack of consensus. Seven retrospective case–control studies reported on the relevance of the transversal plane orientation: Low femoral- or low combined femoral and acetabular anteversion was statistical significantly related with more posterior dislocations, and high femoral- or combined femoral and acetabular anteversion with anterior dislocations in two studies. There were insufficient data on sagittal and coronal component orientation in relation to implant stability. Conclusion: Because of incomparable definitions, limited quality and heterogeneity in methodology of the included studies, there is only weak evidence that the degree of transverse component version is related with implant stability in primary THA. Recommendations about the optimal orientation of the femoral component in all three anatomical planes cannot be provided. Future studies should uniformly define the three-dimensional orientation of the femoral component and systematically describe implant stability., Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics

Background: Anterior and posterior pelvic tilt appears to play a role in total hip arthroplasty (THA) stability. When changing from the standing to the sitting position, the pelvis typically rotates posteriorly while the hips flex and this affects the femoro-acetabular positions. This case-control study compares changes in 3-D acetabular cup orientation during functional pelvic tilt between posterior THA dislocations vs stable THAs. Methods: Standing and sitting 3-D cup orientation was compared between fifteen posterior dislocations vs 233 prospectively followed stable THAs. 3-D cup orientation was calculated using previously validated trigonometric algorithms on biplanar radiographs. Those algorithms combine the angles in the three anatomical planes (coronal inclination, transverse version, and sagittal ante-inclination) in the standing position with the change in sagittal pelvic tilt from standing to sitting to calculate the 3-D orientation in the sitting position. Results: The standing cup orientation of the dislocated THAs was only characterized by a lower coronal inclination (P =.039). Compared with the controls, from standing to sitting, they showed less posterior pelvic tilt (P <.001). This led to a significant lower coronal inclination (P <.001) and sagittal ante-inclination (P <.001) in the sitting position but similar transverse version (P =.366). Conclusions: Comparing posterior THA dislocations to stable THAs, there is a lower increase of all three orientation angles from standing to sitting. This leads to a decreased sitting coronal inclination and sagittal ante-inclination which may lead to an increased risk of impingement ensued by THA instability. By contrast, the transverse version was not significantly different in both positions. This confirms the importance of biplanar data on functional cup orientation. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic, Level III., Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics

Objective: To determine the comparability among 10 radiographic anteversion methods for acetabular cup orientation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) found in the literature and the “gold” standard of assessing the anteversion with CT. Methods: This is a retrospective study that blindly compares 10 different conventional radiographic anteversion measurements with the “gold” standard, the measurement of anteversion on the transverse plane of the 3-D images made with CT. The patient archiving and communications system (PACS) was systematically searched for subjects that had undergone a CT angiogram of the abdomen and lower extremities, including the pelvis, had at least one THA in situ and had undergone anterior-posterior (AP) and cross-lateral pelvic radiography between January 2013 and August 2016 in the Diakonessenhuis Hospital Utrecht/Zeist, a non-academic institution. CT scans of patients (n = 16) were systematically collected. Three observers independently measured cup anteversion from radiographs, using a total of 10 different methods, and measured the “gold” standard on CT images. The outcomes of the 10 radiographic anteversion were compared in terms of linear correlation with the “gold” standard on CT images. Results: The correlations of the radiographic measured anteversions with the “gold” standard measured on CT images were 0.528 for the method of Liaw, 0.556 for Wan, 0.562 for the cross-lateral method, 0.586 for Hassan, 0.594 for Dorr, 0.602 for Lewinnek, 0.624 for Widmer, 0.671 for the lateral CT, 0.747 for Ackland, and 0.771 for the method of Riten Pradham. Conclusion: Anteversion measurement methods represent different projectional angles of the acetabular cup in different planes around different axes. Therefore, they differ from the “gold” standard and are not interchangeable, as is shown by this study. We consider the anatomical anteversion in the transverse plane rotating around the longitudinal axis as the “gold” standard and recommend avoiding usi, Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics