OBJECTIVES: To study the vascularity and bone metabolism of the femoral head/neck following hip resurfacing arthroplasty, and to use these results to compare the posterior and the trochanteric-flip approaches. METHODS: In our previous work, we reported changes to intra-operative blood flow during hip resurfacing arthroplasty comparing two surgical approaches. In this study, we report the vascularity and the metabolic bone function in the proximal femur in these same patients at one year after the surgery. Vascularity and bone function was assessed using scintigraphic techniques. Of the 13 patients who agreed to take part, eight had their arthroplasty through a posterior approach and five through a trochanteric-flip approach. RESULTS: One year after surgery, we found no difference in the vascularity (vascular phase) and metabolic bone function (delayed phase) at the junction of the femoral head/neck between the two groups of patients. Higher radiopharmaceutical uptake was found in the region of the greater trochanter in the trochanteric-flip group, related to the healing osteotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings using scintigraphic techniques suggest that the greater intra-operative reduction in blood flow to the junction of the femoral head/neck, which is seen with the posterior approach compared with trochanteric flip, does not result in any difference in vascularity or metabolic bone function one year after surgery.
OBJECTIVES: To study the vascularity and bone metabolism of the femoral head/neck following hip resurfacing arthroplasty, and to use these results to compare the posterior and the trochanteric-flip approaches. METHODS: In our previous work, we reported changes to intra-operative blood flow during hip resurfacing arthroplasty comparing two surgical approaches. In this study, we report the vascularity and the metabolic bone function in the proximal femur in these same patients at one year after the surgery. Vascularity and bone function was assessed using scintigraphic techniques. Of the 13 patients who agreed to take part, eight had their arthroplasty through a posterior approach and five through a trochanteric-flip approach. RESULTS: One year after surgery, we found no difference in the vascularity (vascular phase) and metabolic bone function (delayed phase) at the junction of the femoral head/neck between the two groups of patients. Higher radiopharmaceutical uptake was found in the region of the greater trochanter in the trochanteric-flip group, related to the healing osteotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings using scintigraphic techniques suggest that the greater intra-operative reduction in blood flow to the junction of the femoral head/neck, which is seen with the posterior approach compared with trochanteric flip, does not result in any difference in vascularity or metabolic bone function one year after surgery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bone scanning; Hip resurfacing; Metabolic bone function; SPECT CT; Scintigraphy; Vascularity
Does a drop in intra-operative blood flow to the femoral head
during the posterior approach influence long-term vascularity or
metabolic bone function?One year after surgery, scintigraphic imaging could not demonstrate
any residual difference in vascularity or metabolic bone function
to the femoral head/neck regionBone scintigraphy is a functional imaging tool that enables vascularity
and metabolic bone function to be quantitatively assessed, and this
can be performed in the presence of metal implantsBone scintigraphy is limited by the sensitivity and spatial resolution
of the imaging equipmentThe study is limited by the small number of patients investigated
Introduction
The functional anatomy of the blood supply to the head and neck
of the femur has been a point of debate for many years. However,
since the femoral head and neck are removed during total hip replacement,
the issue was mostly of academic interest to arthroplasty surgeons.
The use of resurfacing arthroplasty, where the head and neck are
preserved, has recently brought this debate back into focus.Traditionally, the posterior approach was favoured by the majority
of surgeons -performing resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip, but
this approach has been associated with damage to vessels supplying
the femoral head and neck.[1,2] Other surgical approaches
may avoid such injury; including the trochanteric flip approach
described by Ganz et al.[3] Several
studies have subsequently confirmed that there is a significant
difference in intra-operative blood flow between the two approaches.[4-7] However, most patients undergoing
resurfacing through a posterior approach do not suffer avascular
necrosis.[8] Our hypothesis
was that this may be because the reduction in blood flow associated
with a posterior approach is only transient, and recovers in the
post-operative period.We studied the same group of patients who had taken part in our
previous intra-operative study.[1] The
aim of this study was to compare the vascularity and metabolic bone
function at the proximal femur between posterior and trochanteric
flip groups at one year after hip resurfacing. Metabolic bone function
is influenced by bone vascularity and osteoblastic activity and
was assessed by a scintigraphic technique, using the relative uptake
of a bone-seeking radiopharmaceutical.
Patients and Methods
The Local Research Ethics Committee approved the study and a
licence was obtained from the Administration of Radioactive Substances
Advisory Committee (ARSAC).All 24 patients who took part in the intra-operative study were
considered for inclusion. Of these, 13 patients agreed to take part.
A summary of patient details is given in Table I.Patient details
Planar and Single Photon Emission
Computed Tomo-graphy (SPECT/CT) scans
Each patient had an injection of 600 MBq Tc-99m-oxidronate (Technoscan;
HDP -Covidien, Fareham, United Kingdom) through an intra-venous
cannula. An initial series of anterior planar dynamic images (5 seconds
per frame) were acquired for 120 seconds starting at the time of
injection (arterial phase). An anterior planar static image was
subsequently acquired at 300 seconds post-injection (venous phase).
An anterior planar static image and a SPECT acquisition, with an accompanying
low-dose CT, were performed at three hours after the injection using
a dual headed SPECT/CT system (Hawkeye; GE Healthcare, Amersham,
United Kingdom) fitted with low energy high-resolution -collimators.
SPECT images were acquired over 360° and consisted of 120 projections
(60 per head), each of 30 seconds duration; total emission image
acquisition time was 30 minutes. Immediately following emission
image acquisition, a low dose CT acquisition (120 kV, 2.5 mA, 10
mm slice thickness) was acquired without the patient moving from
the same bed position. Tomographic images were obtained by an iterative
reconstruction technique incorporating a measured attenuation correction
map. Reconstruction filtration consisted of a Butterworth low-pass
filter with an order 15 and cut-off of 0.35 cycles/pixel. The data
was saved in coronal, transverse and sagittal slices. Total radiation
exposure to the patient was 4 mSv.
Image analysis
Images were analysed using a GE Xeleris functional imaging workstation
(GE Healthcare, Hatfield, United Kingdom). The images were studied
in two phases; 1) the early phase images taken within 5 minutes of
isotope injection, and 2) delayed phase images taken three hours
after injection. The early phase was sub-divided into arterial and
venous phases. The dynamic arterial phase images showed tracer in
only major arterial trunks; these images were not assessed further.
The venous images were assessed using defined regions of interest
(ROIs) derived from the delayed planar image. The planar vascular
and delayed images were aligned and the three ROIs defined on the
delayed image were applied to both the vascular and delayed images
(Fig. 1).Planar images showing the three
regions of interest (ROIs) in a) the early (vascular) phase and
b) the late phase.The regions of interest were defined as:ROI 1: the femoral head-neck bone, extending from the margin
of the femoral implant into the inter-trochanteric region. This
includes the head-neck junction and the neck region. This corresponds
to the bone studied intra--operatively using the LASER Doppler flow
meter in our previous study.[1]ROI 2: the inter-trochanteric region of bone between the neck
of the femur and the inter-trochanteric line. This also includes
the greater and lesser trochanters. In the trochanteric flip group
this included the osteotomy site.ROI 3: the upper shaft to midshaft of femur. This region was
used as a control.The inter-trochanteric region (ROI 2) was adjusted, when necessary,
to avoid overlying any major blood vessels on the venous images.
For both the venous and delayed planar images the mean count in
the femoral neck and inter-trochanteric regions (ROI 1 and 2) were calculated
and expressed as a ratio to the mean count in the corresponding
femoral region (ROI 3), which was used as a control.For the delayed SPECT/CT images all coronal slices were summed
to allow regional quantification of tracer uptake. The regions of
interest were defined as for the planar images but with two additional
ROIs to quantify background (non-bone) activity in the region of
the prosthesis (ROI 4) and mid-femur (ROI 5) (Fig. 2).A single photon emission computed tomography
(SPECT-CT) image showing the five regions of interest (ROIs).
Statistical analysis
Average background corrected counts derived from the femoral
neck and inter--trochanteric ROIs were calculated and expressed
as a ratio to the background corrected counts from the mid femur
region. Differences in radionuclide uptake between approaches (Trochanteric
flip and Posterior) were displayed graphically using box and whisker plots and formally tested using Mann-Whitney
tests, with significance set at the 5% level.In order to assess the reliability of the definition of the ROIs
for the SPECT/CT image data, three experienced assessors assessed
images and independently determined appropriate ROIs. Intraclass
correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated for each ROI and
used to assess interobserver variation using the ratings suggested by
Landis and Koch[9,10] to assess agreement:
0 to 0.2 poor, 0.2 to 0.4 fair, 0.4 to 0.6 moderate, 0.6 to 0.8
substantial, and 0.8 to 1.0 almost perfect.
Results
The dynamic arterial phase images were visually assessed as showing
no increased activity around the prosthesis for any patient; therefore
these data were not analysed further.For both the venous and delayed planar images the mean count
in the femoral neck and inter-trochanteric regions (ROIs 1 and 2)
were calculated and expressed as a percentage of the mean count
in the corresponding femoral region (ROI 3). Figure 3 shows boxplots
of these data for ROI 1 and ROI 2 for both early and late data.
The median radionuclide uptake and range for ROI 1 in the trochanteric-flip
and posterior approach groups were 1.20% (1.00% to 1.33%) and 1.32%
(1.14% to 1.43%) for early data and 2.75% (1.97% to 3.50%) and 2.97% (2.24%
to 3.83%) for the late data. Equivalent figures for ROI 2 were 1.18%
(1.03% to 1.43%) and 1.17% (0.95% to 1.28%) for early data and 3.02%
(2.59% to 3.41%) and 2.11% (1.52% to 2.80%) for the late data. There
was no statistically significant difference in radionuclide uptake between
the posterior approach group and the trochanteric flip approach
group in the head/neck region (ROI 1) for either early or late data
(p = 0.127 and p = 0.683, respectively; Mann-Whitney test). However,
for the inter-trochanteric region (ROI 2), patients who underwent
the trochanteric flip approach showed a significant increase in
uptake compared with the posterior approach for late phase (p =
0.028; Mann-Whitney test), but not for the early phase (p = 0.943).Boxplots of radionuclide uptake
for a) region of interest (ROI) 1 and b) ROI 2 for planar image
data, both expressed as a percentage of uptake in ROI 3, for each
surgical approach (trochanteric flip and posterior) for late and
early data. The boxes represent the median and interquartile range
(IQR), the whiskers denote 1.5×IQR and ° denotes outliers.For SPECT/CT image data, uptake in ROI 1 and ROI 2 was expressed
as a percentage of the average count in the corresponding femoral
region (ROI 3). The estimated ICCs based on three independent observations of the SPECT/CT images for ROI 1 and 2
were 0.694 (95% bootstrapped
confidence interval (CI) 0.388 to 0.827) and 0.666 (95% CI 0.438
to 0.889), indicating that there was substantial agreement between
assessors in the definition of the both ROI 1 and ROI 2.Figure 4 shows boxplots of these data for ROI 1 and ROI 2 data.
The median radionuclide uptake and range for ROI 1 in the trochanteric-flip
and posterior approach groups were 4.12% (2.76% to 5.06%) and 3.56%
(2.59% to 4.62%), respectively, and in ROI 2 were 3.22% (2.85% to 3.72%)
and 1.83% (1.45% to 3.37%), respectively. There was no statistically
significant difference in radionuclide uptake between the posterior
approach group and the trochanteric flip approach group in the head/neck
region (ROI 1) (p = 0.724, Mann-Whitney test). However, for the inter-trochanteric
region (ROI 2), patients who underwent the trochanteric flip approach
showed a significant increase in uptake compared with the posterior
approach (p = 0.011, Mann-Whitney). A replication of the Mann-Whitney
tests based on the definitions of the ROIs by the secondary assessors
gave p-values of 1.000 and 0.284 for ROI 1, and 0.003 and 0.006
for ROI 2. Therefore, the inferences drawn from these data were
not dependent on the individual assessor used to define the ROIs.Boxplots of radionuclide uptake
for a) region of interest (ROI) 1 and b) ROI 2 for single photon
emission computed tomography (SPECT-CT) image data, both expressed
as a percentage of uptake in ROI 3, for each surgical approach (trochanteric
flip and posterior). The boxes represent the median and interquartile
range (IQR), the whiskers denote 1.5×IQR and ° denotes outliers.In summary, the results in both delayed and late phases of planar
images and the SPECT CT images did not show any statistically significant
difference in ROI 1 (the head/neck region) between the groups, but
increased uptake was seen in trochanteric flip group in ROI 2 (the
inter--trochanteric region) in late and SPECT CT images.
Discussion
Previous studies have shown a clear decrease in the blood supply
to the junction of the head and neck during hip surgery. The posterior
approach appears to cause a larger decrease than other approaches,[1,5-7] so
alternatives such as the trochanteric-flip osteotomy have been used
in an attempt to preserve the vascularity.[3,11] Our
intra--operative blood flow study showed a 40% drop in the posterior
approach group in comparison with only a 11% drop seen with the
trochanteric flip approach.[1] However, the
clinical importance of this intra-operative reduction in blood flow,
and the potential for recovery in the early post-operative period,
have not been investigated as extensively.[8,12]The post-operative assessment of the femoral head and neck using
imaging remains a challenge: especially in the presence of metal
implants. Of the modalities that are available, the most suitable
would appear to be functional bone imaging with SPECT-CT or PET–CT
scans.[13,14] F18 sodium
fluoride-positron emission tomography (PET) scans have a higher
sensitivity but availability is currently limited.[15] We decided to
use SPECT-CT in this study for several reasons including the wide
use of the general imaging technique, the availability of the facility
and cost.Using planar data imaging, we found that there was no statistically
significant difference of radionuclide uptake in the femoral head/neck
region (ROI 1) between the posterior approach and the trochanteric-flip
approach one year after a resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip both
during early (p = 0.127) and delayed phases (p = 0.683). This indicates
that the intra-operative reduction in blood flow, which we identified
in our patients having a posterior approach, does not give rise
to any compromise in vascularity as assessed by a scintigraphic
technique at one year after surgery. The initial loss of blood supply
may be transient but appears to recover during the post-operative period.
However, we cannot say exactly when it recovers within the period
of one year.It is well known that chronic ischemia stimulates -collateral
vessel formation in many tissues, including bone. This was shown
by Freeman[16] and
later tested by Whiteside et al[17] using
a canine model. It is possible that the reduction in blood flow
caused during surgery may lead to the development of collateral
circulation in the proximal femur. The only statistically significant
difference between the two groups occurred in the delayed phase
of inter-trochanteric region (ROI 2), where the trochanteric flip
group showed increased bone activity compared with the posterior
group (p = 0.028). This can be explained by the increased osteoblastic
activity in this region caused by the healing of the trochanteric
flip osteotomy. This suggests that the osteotomy site is still active even
after one year. However in the same region (ROI 2) during the vascular
phase there was no difference between the two groups (p = 0.943),
supporting our hypothesis that post-operative vascularity is the
same in both groups.Further analysis of the images using SPECT-CT data showed similar
findings. SPECT-CT has been used in many clinical scenarios[18-20] and of the various methods available
to detect post-operative bone function, SPECT seems to be the most
appropriate for this group of patients.[21] Bone SPECT has a lower false negative
rate than plain bone scans in diagnosing impaired or enhanced bone
function,[22] and
therefore this technique has been recommended as a tool to assess
post-operative bone activity in orthopaedic patients.[23,24] MRI is another option,[25] but the metal
resurfacing implants interfere with the results, particularly around
the head and neck of the femur.[23,26]There have been concerns regarding the validity of the attenuation
correction technique used to obtain the SPECT-CT images, due to
the adjacent metal of the prosthesis. To validate the attenuation
correction, we conducted a separate phantom modelling study that confirmed
the attenuation correction method works adequately even in the presence
of the resurfacing prosthesis. This was done by making phantom models
of the hip with point sources of the radionuclide Tc99m, kept under and
adjacent to the resurfacing metal implants. SPECT-CT images were
acquired with the implants initially and the tests repeated without
using the implants. There was no significant difference in corrected
uptake between the two groups, indicating that the attenuation correction system
functioned correctly even in the presence of a resurfacing implant.[27]The main limitation is the relatively small number of subjects
available for this study. Our initial study of intra-operative blood
flow included a formal sample size calculation.[1] However, the nature
of the current investigation meant that several of the 24 subjects
included in the earlier study had to be excluded or declined to
take part. This raises the possibility of both a type II error,
that is a lack of statistical power resulting in our false acceptance
of the null hypothesis of no difference between the surgical approaches,
or a type I error, false rejection of the null hypothesis, caused
by the disproportionate influence of a small number of measurements.
However, the relatively narrow ranges observed for both planar and
SPECT CT image data (Figs 3 and 4) indicate good precision in our data,
with no obvious outliers with strong leverage on the analysis. Also,
the fact that a highly significant difference was observed for ROI
2 suggests that if there were actually similar differences between
the two groups for ROI 1, there was sufficient power to reject the
null hypotheses in these cases. For these reasons, and the strong
evidence of substantial reliability in definitions of ROIs (ICCs
of 0.694 and 0.666 for ROI 1 and ROI 2, respectively), we believe that
the results do provide evidence for differences in metabolic bone
function in the inter-trochanteric region (ROI 2) and no significant
difference at the head/neck junction (ROI 1) despite the small number
of patients.The second limitation is that we have not included direct measurements
from the part of the bone directly covered by the metal implant
i.e. the head-neck region is a ‘surrogate’ for the activity under
the implant itself. However, our previous intra-operative study
addressed the blood-flow in this same head/neck region and demonstrated
clear differences between the approaches in this area.[2]Despite our results, loosening, fractures and avascular necrosis
do still occur in the early post-operative period in some patients.[28] The cause of such
complications is likely to be multi-factorial, with the blood flow
to this region of bone playing a role.[29] This is clinically extremely relevant, as
the failures have raised concerns over the widespread use of resurfacing
as an alternative to total hip arthroplasty.[30-32] Data
from the National Joint Registry for -England and Wales has shown
a sharp fall in hip resurfacing operations over the last few years.[33]In conclusion, this study demonstrates that the decrease in vascularity
at the head/neck junction shown during the intra-operative period
appears to be transient and vascularity and bone metabolism is the
same in both groups at one year after surgery. Secondly, the study shows
that the trochanteric osteotomy site still shows metabolic bone
activity even one year after surgery. -Further studies may be needed
to determine when and how this blood flow recovers.
Authors: Paul E Beaulé; Pat Campbell; Zhen Lu; Katharina Leunig-Ganz; Martin Beck; Michael Leunig; Reinhold Ganz Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: D Thickman; L Axel; H Y Kressel; M Steinberg; H Chen; M Velchick; M Fallon; M Dalinka Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 1986 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Oliver Dobrindt; Holger Amthauer; Alexander Krueger; Juri Ruf; Heiko Wissel; Oliver S Grosser; Max Seidensticker; Christoph H Lohmann Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 1.930
Authors: H W Amarasekera; P C Campbell; N Parsons; J Achten; J Masters; D R Griffin; M L Costa Journal: Bone Joint Res Date: 2013-09-18 Impact factor: 5.853