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.

BACKGROUND: Decreased pelvic mobility and pelvic retroversion may result from spinal degeneration and lead to changes in the orientation of the acetabular implant after total hip arthroplasty (THA). While multiple patient and surgery-related factors contribute to THA dislocations, there is increasing evidence that sagittal spinopelvic dynamics are relevant for THA stability. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the relationship between previously described sagittal spinopelvic characteristics and implant dislocations after primary THA. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search in the PubMed and Embase databases was conducted for studies reporting on spinopelvic morphology, alignment, pathology, or surgery and THA dislocations. Risk of bias was assessed using the MINORS criteria. Because of high heterogeneity in study methodology, a synthesis of best evidence was performed. Odds ratios (ORs), relative risks (RRs), and effect sizes (g) were calculated. RESULTS: Fifteen studies (1,007,900 THAs) with quality scores of 15 to 23 out of 24 were included. Nine different spinopelvic alignment parameters (8 studies, g = 0.14 to 2.02), spinal pathology (2 studies, OR = 1.9 to 29.2), and previous spinal fusion surgery (8 studies, OR = 1.59 to 23.7, RR = 3.0) were found to be related to THA dislocation. Conflicting results were found for another sagittal pelvic morphology parameter, pelvic incidence. CONCLUSIONS: Several sagittal spinopelvic patient characteristics were found to be related to THA dislocation, and the associated risks were greater than for other patient and surgery-related factors. Future research is needed to determine which of those characteristics and parameters should be taken into account in patients undergoing primary THA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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 can be assessed in 3-D, regardless of the imaging modality.

A solution for challenging hip dysplasia surgery could be a patient-specific 3D-printed shelf implant that is positioned extra-articular and restores the dysplastic acetabular rim to normal anatomical dimensions. The anatomical correction and biomechanical stability of this concept were tested in a canine model that, like humans, also suffers from hip dysplasia. Using 3D reconstructed computed tomography images the 3D shelf implant was designed to restore the radiological dysplastic hip parameters to healthy parameters. It was tested ex vivo on three dog cadavers (six hips) with hip dysplasia. Each hip was subjected to a biomechanical subluxation test, first without and then with the 3D shelf implant in place. Subsequently, an implant failure test was performed to test the primary implant fixation. At baseline, the dysplastic hips had an average Norberg angle of 88 ± 3° and acetabular coverage of 47 ± 2% and subluxated at an average of 83 ± 2° of femoral adduction. After adding the patient-specific shelf implants the dysplastic hips had an average Norberg angle of 122 ± 2° and acetabular coverage of 67 ± 3% and subluxated at an average of 117 ± 2° of femoral adduction. Implant failure after primary implant fixation occurred at an average of 1330 ± 320 Newton. This showed that the patient-specific shelf implants significantly improved the coverage and stability of dysplastic hips in a canine model with naturally occurring hip dysplasia. The 3D shelf is a promising concept for treating residual hip dysplasia with a straightforward technology-driven approach; however, the clinical safety needs to be further investigated in an experimental proof-of-concept animal study.

The concept of a novel patient-specific 3D-printed shelf implant should be evaluated in a relevant large animal model with hip dysplasia. Therefore, three dogs with radiographic bilateral hip dysplasia and a positive subluxation test underwent unilateral acetabular augmentation with a 3D-printed dog-specific titanium implant. The contralateral side served as control. The implants were designed on CT-based pelvic bone segmentations and extended the dysplastic acetabular rim to increase the weight bearing surface without impairing the range of motion. Outcome was assessed by clinical observation, manual subluxation testing, radiography, CT, and gait analysis from 6 weeks preoperatively until termination at 26 weeks postoperatively. Thereafter, all hip joints underwent histopathological examination. The implantation and recovery from surgery was uneventful. Clinical subluxation tests at the intervention side became negative. Imaging showed medialization of the femoral head at the intervention side and the mean (range) CE-angle increased from 94° (84°-99°) preoperative to 119° (117°-120°) postoperative. Gait analysis parameters returned to pre-operative levels after an average follow-up of 6 weeks. Histology showed a thickened synovial capsule between the implant and the femoral head without any evidence of additional damage to the articular cartilage compared to the control side. The surgical implantation of the 3D shelf was safe and feasible. The patient-specific 3D-printed shelf implants restored the femoral head coverage and stability of dysplastic hips without complications. The presented approach holds promise to treat residual hip dysplasia justifying future veterinary clinical trials to establish clinical effectiveness in a larger cohort to prepare for translation to human clinic.

BACKGROUND: Sagittal pelvic dynamics mainly consist of the pelvis rotating anteriorly or posteriorly while the hips flexes, and this affects the femoroacetabular or THA configuration. Thus far, it is unknown how the acetabular cup of the THA in the individual patient reorients with changing sagittal pelvic dynamics. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The aim of this study was to validate a method that establishes the three-dimensional (3-D) acetabular cup orientation with changing sagittal pelvic dynamics and describe these changes during functional pelvic dynamics. METHODS: A novel trigonometric mathematical model, which was incorporated into an easy-to-use tool, was tested. The model connected sagittal tilt, transverse version, and coronal inclination of the acetabular cup during sagittal pelvic tilt. Furthermore, the effect of sagittal pelvic tilt on the 3-D reorientation of acetabular cups was simulated for cups with different initial positions. Twelve pelvic CT images of patients who underwent THA were taken and rotated around the hip axis to different degrees of anterior and posterior sagittal pelvic tilt (± 30°) to simulate functional pelvic tilt in various body positions. For each simulated pelvic tilt, the transverse version and coronal inclination of the cup were manually measured and compared with those measured in a mathematical model in which the 3-D cup positions were calculated. Next, this model was applied to different acetabular cup positions to simulate the effect of sagittal pelvic dynamics on the 3-D orientation of the acetabular cup in the coronal and transverse plane. After pelvic tilt was applied, the intraclass correlation coefficients of 108 measured and calculated coronal and transverse cup orientation angles were 0.963 and 0.990, respectively, validating the clinical use of the mathematical model. RESULTS: The changes in 3-D acetabular cup orientation by functional pelvic tilt differed substantially between cups with different initial positions; the change in transverse version was much more pronounced in cups with low coronal inclination (from 50° to -29°) during functional pelvic tilt than in cups with a normal coronal inclination (from 39° to -11°) or high coronal inclination (from 31° to 2°). However, changes in coronal inclination were more pronounced in acetabular cups with high transverse version. CONCLUSION: Using a simple algorithm to determine the dynamic 3-D reorientation of the acetabular cup during functional sagittal pelvic tilt, we demonstrated that the 3-D effect of functional pelvic tilt is specific to the initial acetabular cup orientation and thus per THA patient. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Future studies concerning THA (in)stability should not only include the initial acetabular cup orientation, but also they need to incorporate the effect of sagittal pelvic dynamics on the individual 3-D acetabular cup orientation. Clinicians can also use the developed tool, www.3d-hip.com, to calculate the acetabular cup's orientation in other instances, such as for patients with spinopelvic imbalance.

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.

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.

AIMS: The aetiologies of common degenerative spine, hip, and knee pathologies are still not completely understood. Mechanical theories have suggested that those diseases are related to sagittal pelvic morphology and spinopelvic-femoral dynamics. The link between the most widely used parameter for sagittal pelvic morphology, pelvic incidence (PI), and the onset of degenerative lumbar, hip, and knee pathologies has not been studied in a large-scale setting. METHODS: A total of 421 patients from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) database, a population-based observational cohort, with hip and knee complaints < 6 months, aged between 45 and 65 years old, and with lateral lumbar, hip, and knee radiographs available, were included. Sagittal spinopelvic parameters and pathologies (spondylolisthesis and degenerative disc disease (DDD)) were measured at eight-year follow-up and characteristics of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) at baseline and eight-year follow-up. Epidemiology of the degenerative disorders and clinical outcome scores (hip and knee pain and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) were compared between low PI (< 50°), normal PI (50° to 60°), and high PI (> 60°) using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Demographic details were not different between the different PI groups. L4 to L5 and L5 to S1 spondylolisthesis were more frequently present in subjects with high PI compared to low PI (L4 to L5, OR 3.717; p = 0.024 vs L5 to S1 OR 7.751; p = 0.001). L5 to S1 DDD occurred more in patients with low PI compared to high PI (OR 1.889; p = 0.010), whereas there were no differences in L4 to L5 DDD among individuals with a different PI. The incidence of hip OA was higher in participants with low PI compared to normal (OR 1.262; p = 0.414) or high PI (OR 1.337; p = 0.274), but not statistically different. The incidence of knee OA was higher in individuals with a high PI compared to low PI (OR 1.620; p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: High PI is a risk factor for development of spondylolisthesis and knee OA. Low pelvic incidence is related to DDD, and may be linked to OA of the hip. Level of Evidence: 1b Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1261-1267.

BACKGROUND: Anterior glenohumeral instability with >20% glenoid bone loss is a disorder that can be treated with the Latarjet stabilizing procedure; however, complications are common. The purposes of this study were to (1) evaluate the effect of an anatomic-specific titanium implant produced by 3-dimensional (3D) printing as a treatment option for recurrent shoulder instability with substantial glenoid bone loss and (2) compare the use of that implant with the Latarjet procedure. METHODS: Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders (mean age at the time of death, 78 years) were tested in a biomechanical setup with the humerus in 30° of abduction and in neutral rotation. The shoulders were tested under 5 different conditions: (1) normal situation, (2) creation of an anterior glenoid defect, (3) implantation of an anatomic-specific titanium implant produced by 3D printing, and the Latarjet procedure (4) with and (5) without 10 N of load attached to the conjoined tendon. In each condition, the humerus was translated 10 mm anteriorly relative to the glenoid, and the maximum peak translational force that was necessary for this translation was measured. RESULTS: After creation of the glenoid defect, the mean translational peak force decreased by 30% ± 6% compared with that for the normal shoulder. After restoration of the original glenoid anatomy, the translational force needed to dislocate the humeral head from the glenoid significantly increased compared with that in the defect condition-to 119% ± 16% of normal (p < 0.01) with the 3D-printed anatomic-specific implant and to 121% ± 48% of normal (p < 0.01) following the Latarjet procedure. No significant differences in mean translational force were found between the anatomic-specific implant and the Latarjet procedure (p = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: The mean translational peak force needed to dislocate the humerus 10 mm anteriorly on the glenoid was higher after glenoid restoration with the 3D-printed anatomic-specific implant compared with when the glenoid had a 20% surface defect but also compared with when the glenoid was intact. No differences in mean translational peak force were found between the 3D-printed anatomic-specific glenoid implant and the Latarjet procedure, although there was less variability in the 3D-implant condition. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Novel 3D-printing technology could provide a reliable patient-specific alternative to solve problems related to traditional treatment methods for shoulder instability.

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 using the term anteversion for other projectional angles in different planes.

Background: Additive manufacturing or three-dimensional (3D) printing of metal implants can provide novel solutions for difficult-to-treat conditions, yet legislation concerning patient-specific implants complicates the implementation of these techniques in daily practice. In this Article, we share our acquired knowledge of the logistical and legal challenges associated with the use of patient-specific 3D-printed implants to treat spinal instabilities. Methods: Two patients with semiurgent cases of spinal instability presented to our hospital in the Netherlands. In case 1, severe kyphotic deformity of the thoracic spine due to neurofibromatosis type 1 had led to incomplete paralysis, and a strong metallic strut extending from C6 to T11 was deemed necessary to provide long-term anterior support. In case 2, the patient presented with progressive paralysis caused by cervicothoracic dissociation due to vanishing bone disease. As the C5–T1 vertebral bodies had mostly vanished, an implant spanning the anterior spine from C4 to T2 was required. Because of the complex and challenging nature of both cases, conventional approaches were deemed inadequate; instead, patient-specific implants were designed with use of CT scans and computer-aided design software, and 3D printed in titanium with direct metal printing. For each implant, to ensure patient safety, a comprehensive technical file (describing the clinical substantiation, technical and design considerations, risk analysis, manufacturing process, and labelling) was produced in collaboration with a university department certified for the development and manufacturing of medical devices. Because the implants were categorised as custom-made or personalised devices under the EU Medical Device Regulation, the usual procedures for review and approval of medical devices by a notified body were not required. Finite-element analyses, compression strength tests, and cadaveric experiments were also done to ensure the devices were safe to use. Findings: The planning, design, production, and insertion of the 3D-printed personalised implant took around 6 months in the first patient, but, given the experience from the first case, only took around 6 weeks in the second patient. In both patients, the surgeries went as planned and good positioning of each implant was confirmed. Both patients were discharged home within 1 week after the surgery. In the first patient, a fatigue fracture occured in one of the conventional posterior fusion rods after 10 months, which we repaired, without any deformation of the spine or signs of failure of the personalised implant observed. No other adverse events occurred up to 25 months of follow-up in case 1 and 6 months of follow-up in case 2. Interpretation: Patient-specific treatment approaches incorporating 3D-printed implants can be helpful in carefully selected cases when conventional methods are not an option. Comprehensive and efficient interactions between medical engineers and physicians are essential to establish well designed frameworks to navigate the logistical and regulatory aspects of technology development to ensure the safety and legal validity of patient-specific treatments. The framework described here could encourage physicians to treat (once untreatable) patients with novel personalised techniques. Funding: Interreg VA Flanders—The Netherlands programme, Applied and Engineering Sciences research programme, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, and the Dutch Arthritis Foundation Video Abstract.

Introduction: Dislocation is one of the main reasons for revision of total hip arthroplasty but dislocation rates have not changed in the past decades, compromising patients’ well-being. Acetabular cup orientation plays a key role in implant stability and has been widely studied. This article investigates whether there is a consensus on optimal cup orientation, which is necessary when using a navigation system. Methods: A systematic search of the literature in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed (March 2017) to identify articles that investigated the direct relationship between cup orientation and dislocation, including a thorough evaluation of postoperative cup orientation assessment methods. Results: Twenty eight relevant articles evaluating a direct relation between dislocation and cup orientation could not come to a consensus. The key reason is a lack of uniformity in the assessment of cup orientation. Cup orientation is assessed with different imaging modalities, different methodologies, different definitions for inclination and anteversion, several reference planes and distinct patient positions. Conclusions: All available studies lack uniformity in cup orientation assessment; therefore it is impossible to reach consensus on optimal cup orientation. Using navigation systems for placement of the cup is inevitably flawed when using different definitions in the preoperative planning, peroperative placement and postoperative evaluation. Further methodological development is required to assess cup orientation. Consequently, the postoperative assessment should be uniform, thus differentiating between anterior and posterior dislocation, use the same definitions for inclination and anteversion with the same reference plane and with the patient in the same position.