J. H.J. van Erp
Please Note
6 records found
1
Prospective Evaluation of Hip-Spine Dynamics in Patients Who Have a Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Dislocation
A Matched Case-Control Study
Background Understanding of the comprehensive hip-spine relationship may reduce total hip arthroplasty (THA) dislocation. However, the impact of sagittal spino-pelvic dynamics on three-dimensional implant orientation has not been investigated prospectively. This study aimed to assess hip-spine dynamics and changes in three-dimensional implant orientation in patients who have stable and unstable primary THAs. Methods In this prospective, case-control study, 23 adults who had a THA dislocation were matched to 23 patients who had a stable implant. Of the 23 dislocations, 17 sustained a posterior, and five sustained an anterior dislocation; one was unknown. Standing anterior-posterior and standing and sitting lateral pelvic radiographs were obtained. Sagittal spinopelvic morphology and orientation parameters, coronal and sagittal acetabular cup, and femoral component orientation parameters were measured. Transverse component orientation parameters were computed. Logistic regressions were conducted to determine the impact of demographics and hip-spine parameters on the likelihood for dislocation. Results The unstable THAs had significantly higher pelvic incidence (PI; 60 ± 13° versus 52 ± 10°, P = 0.015) and transverse version of the acetabular component (TVCup; 38 ± 11° versus 32 ± 8°, P = 0.042) compared to the stable THAs. Patients who have anterior dislocations had higher sagittal ante-inclination of the acetabular component (SAICup) than posterior dislocations (48 ± 5° versus 34 ± 10°, P = 0.012). Based on logistic regression analyses, PI, TVCup, and the approach were significant predictors of THA dislocation. Conclusions By assessment of spino-pelvic characteristics, surgeons could identify patients at increased risk for THA dislocation preoperatively based on a high PI. Posterior dislocations seem to occur more in patients who have more TVCup and a postero-lateral approach, anterior dislocations seem to occur in patients who have more SAICup, TVCup, and a direct anterior approach. This suggests implementing a patient-specific functional safe zone of the acetabular component may further reduce THA dislocation rates.
Unravelling the hip-spine dilemma from the CHECK-cohort
Is sagittal pelvic morphology linked to radiographic signs of femoroacetabular impingement?
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.
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.
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.
The role of the femoral component orientation on dislocations in THA
A systematic review
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.
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.