The role of the femoral component orientation on dislocations in THA

a systematic review

Review (2021)
Author(s)

Joost H.J. van Erp ( University Medical Centre Utrecht, Clinical Orthopedic Research Center Midden-Nederland, Diakonessehuis Utrecht)

Thom E. Snijders (Clinical Orthopedic Research Center Midden-Nederland, Diakonessehuis Utrecht)

Harrie Weinans ( University Medical Centre Utrecht, TU Delft - Mechanical Engineering)

René M. Castelein ( University Medical Centre Utrecht)

Tom P.C. Schlösser ( University Medical Centre Utrecht)

Arthur de Gast (Diakonessehuis Utrecht, Clinical Orthopedic Research Center Midden-Nederland)

Research Group
Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-03982-1 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2021
Language
English
Research Group
Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics
Journal title
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
Issue number
6
Volume number
142
Pages (from-to)
1253-1264
Downloads counter
304
Collections
Institutional Repository
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

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.