BACKGROUND: Offset in THA correlates to abductor muscle function, wear, and impingement. Femoral offset after THA is not independent of the cup center of rotation (COR) so hip offset, a combination of femoral offset and change in hip COR, becomes the important measurement. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked whether hip offset in arthritic hips would correlate with cup COR; whether offset could always be balanced within 6 mm of contralateral normal hips; and whether hip length could also be kept within 6 mm. METHODS: We compared hip offset of arthritic and contralateral normal hips on radiographs in 82 patients (82 hips) who had THA. We used computer navigation in all patients with the aim of reconstructing the hip offset and to compare hip offset change to the quantitative change of the hip COR. RESULTS: The preoperative radiographic change to equalize the offset ranged from -12 to +21 mm (mean, 1.5); postoperatively the change was 1.4 ± 6.4 mm and was within ± 6 mm in 78 of 82 hips. As COR displaced superiorly from 3 to 6+ mm the offset had to be substantially increased. Only with COR 0-3 mm superior and 0-5 mm medial was offset always within 5 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Hip offset reconstruction was directly related to the position of the hip COR, and navigation allowed quantitative control of offset and hip length.
BACKGROUND: Offset in THA correlates to abductor muscle function, wear, and impingement. Femoral offset after THA is not independent of the cup center of rotation (COR) so hip offset, a combination of femoral offset and change in hip COR, becomes the important measurement. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked whether hip offset in arthritic hips would correlate with cup COR; whether offset could always be balanced within 6 mm of contralateral normal hips; and whether hip length could also be kept within 6 mm. METHODS: We compared hip offset of arthritic and contralateral normal hips on radiographs in 82 patients (82 hips) who had THA. We used computer navigation in all patients with the aim of reconstructing the hip offset and to compare hip offset change to the quantitative change of the hip COR. RESULTS: The preoperative radiographic change to equalize the offset ranged from -12 to +21 mm (mean, 1.5); postoperatively the change was 1.4 ± 6.4 mm and was within ± 6 mm in 78 of 82 hips. As COR displaced superiorly from 3 to 6+ mm the offset had to be substantially increased. Only with COR 0-3 mm superior and 0-5 mm medial was offset always within 5 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Hip offset reconstruction was directly related to the position of the hip COR, and navigation allowed quantitative control of offset and hip length.
Authors: Mauricio Silva; Kee Haeng Lee; Christian Heisel; Mylene A Dela Rosa; Thomas P Schmalzried Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Markus Weber; Michael Woerner; Robert Springorum; Ernst Sendtner; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Joachim Grifka; Tobias Renkawitz Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: José A Rodriguez; Ajit J Deshmukh; Parthiv A Rathod; Michelle L Greiz; Prashant P Deshmane; Matthew S Hepinstall; Amar S Ranawat Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 4.176