Literature DB >> 26224610

The influence of stem offset and neck shaft angles on the range of motion in total hip arthroplasty.

Takeshi Shoji1, Takuma Yamasaki2, Soutarou Izumi2, Susumu Hachisuka2, Mitsuo Ochi2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of stem offset and neck shaft angles on the range of motion before component impingement (ROMCI) and bony impingement (ROMBI), and the types of impingement in total hip arthroplasty (THA).
METHODS: Using the computed tomography data of 101 patients who underwent THA, three-dimensional dynamic motion analysis was performed using a modular implant (Kinectiv(®) stem) that enabled adjustment of offset and leg length independently. We defined offset as horizontal offset (HO) and leg length as vertical offset (VO), and measured the ROMCI and ROMBI in flexion (Flex), internal rotation (Int-R) and external rotation (Ext-R) with the configuration of each horizontal/vertical offset.
RESULTS: We found that HO lengthening increased the ROMCI and ROMBI in Flex and Int-R by delaying bony impingement, although excessive lengthening had minimal effect. On the contrary, VO lengthening decreased the ROMCI and ROMBI in Flex and ROMCI in Int-R. As for Ext-R, VO lengthening had positive effects on the ROMCI and ROMBI, whereas lengthening of HO had negative effects on the ROMCI and ROMBI.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the appropriate long offset with a low shaft angle increased the ROM in Flex and Int-R, and a high neck shaft angle increased the ROM in Ext-R. We should use implants properly in accordance with the types of impingement for avoiding dislocations in THA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dislocation; Impingement; Neck shaft angle; Offset; Three-dimensional motion analysis; Total hip arthroplasty

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26224610     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-015-2826-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  23 in total

1.  Efforts to improve cementless femoral stems in THR: 2- to 5-year follow-up of a high-offset femoral stem with distal stem modification (Secur-Fit Plus).

Authors:  Stephen J Incavo; Todd Havener; Eric Benson; Brian J McGrory; Kathryn M Coughlin; Bruce D Beynnon
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  The Frank Stinchfield Award: Dislocation in revision THA: do large heads (36 and 40 mm) result in reduced dislocation rates in a randomized clinical trial?

Authors:  Donald S Garbuz; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan; Nelson V Greidanus; Eric R Bohm; Martin J Petrak; Craig J Della Valle; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Which procedure better restores intact hip range of motion: total hip arthroplasty or resurfacing? A combined cadaveric and computer simulation study.

Authors:  Stephen J Incavo; Matthew T Thompson; Jonathan E Gold; Rikin V Patel; Kurt D Icenogle; Philip C Noble
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Biomechanics of large femoral heads: what they do and don't do.

Authors:  Roy D Crowninshield; William J Maloney; Douglas H Wentz; Steve M Humphrey; Cheryl R Blanchard
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Comparative effectiveness of metal-on-metal and metal-on-polyethylene bearings in Medicare total hip arthroplasty patients.

Authors:  Kevin J Bozic; Edmund C Lau; Kevin L Ong; Thomas P Vail; Harry E Rubash; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 4.757

6.  Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multivariate analysis.

Authors:  B M Jolles; P Zangger; P-F Leyvraz
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  Effect of femoral offset on range of motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  B J McGrory; B F Morrey; T D Cahalan; K N An; M E Cabanela
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1995-11

8.  A comparative and retrospective study of three hundred and twenty primary Charnley type hip replacements with a minimum follow up of ten years to assess whether a dual mobility cup has a decreased dislocation risk.

Authors:  Jacques H Caton; Jean Louis Prudhon; André Ferreira; Thierry Aslanian; Régis Verdier
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 9.  Over 25 years survival after Charnley's total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jacques Caton; Jean Louis Prudhon
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-01-21       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Age- and health-related quality of life after total hip replacement: decreasing gains in patients above 70 years of age.

Authors:  Max Gordon; Meridith Greene; Paolo Frumento; Ola Rolfson; Göran Garellick; André Stark
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  10 in total

1.  Safety range for acute limb lengthening in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Tamon Kabata; Yoshitomo Kajino; Daisuke Inoue; Takaaki Ohmori; Junya Yoshitani; Takuro Ueno; Ken Ueoka; Hiroyuki Tsuchiya
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Influence of femoral bowing on range of motion after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Keisuke Akiyama; Takaaki Shibuya
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-12-23       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Soft tissue restricts impingement-free mobility in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Michael Woerner; Markus Weber; Ernst Sendtner; Robert Springorum; Michael Worlicek; Benjamin Craiovan; Joachim Grifka; Tobias Renkawitz
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-05-06       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  A forty millimetre head significantly improves range of motion compared with a twenty eight millimetre head in total hip arthroplasty using a computed tomography-based navigation system.

Authors:  Kosuke Tsuda; Keiji Haraguchi; Junichiro Koyanagi; Shintaro Takahashi; Ryo Sugama; Keiju Fujiwara
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  What do we get from navigation in primary THA?

Authors:  Lisa Renner; Viktor Janz; Carsten Perka; Georgi I Wassilew
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2017-03-13

6.  Relationships between the femoral neck-preserving ratio and radiologic and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing total-hip arthroplasty with a collum femoris-preserving stem.

Authors:  Zeming Liu; Hongpeng Hu; Sikai Liu; Jia Huo; Mengnan Li; Yongtai Han
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Comparison of Clinical Outcomes, Radiological Outcomes and Bone Remodeling Outcomes Between Proximal Coated Single-Wedge New Stem and Full Coated Dual-Wedge Classic Stem in 1-Stage Bilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hongpeng Hu; Zeming Liu; Bo Liu; Xuzhuang Ding; Sikai Liu; Tao Wu; Wenhui Ma; Yongtai Han
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-01-31

8.  How much change in pelvic sagittal tilt can result in hip dislocation due to prosthetic impingement? A computer simulation study.

Authors:  Aidin Eslam Pour; Ran Schwarzkopf; Kunj Paresh Kumar Patel; Manan P Anjaria; Jean Yves Lazennec; Lawrence D Dorr
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 3.102

9.  Bone-to-Bone and Implant-to-Bone Impingement: A Novel Graphical Representation for Hip Replacement Planning.

Authors:  Arnab Palit; Richard King; Zoe Hart; Yolanda Gu; James Pierrepont; Mark T Elliott; Mark A Williams
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 3.934

10.  Inaccurate offset restoration in total hip arthroplasty results in reduced range of motion.

Authors:  Markus Weber; Christian Merle; Danyal H Nawabi; Sebastian Dendorfer; Joachim Grifka; Tobias Renkawitz
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 4.379

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.