Literature DB >> 30295537

Pelvic positioning in the supine position leads to more consistent orientation of the acetabular component after total hip arthroplasty.

G Grammatopoulos1, W Gofton2, M Cochran2, J Dobransky2, A Carli2, H Abdelbary2, H S Gill3, P E Beaulé2.   

Abstract

AIMS: This study aims to: determine the difference in pelvic position that occurs between surgery and radiographic, supine, postoperative assessment; examine how the difference in pelvic position influences subsequent component orientation; and establish whether differences in pelvic position, and thereafter component orientation, exist between total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed in the supine versus the lateral decubitus positions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The intra- and postoperative anteroposterior pelvic radiographs of 321 THAs were included; 167 were performed with the patient supine using the anterior approach and 154 were performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus using the posterior approach. The inclination and anteversion of the acetabular component was measured and the difference (Δ) between the intra- and postoperative radiographs was determined. The target zone was inclination/anteversion of 40°/20° (± 10°). Changes in the tilt, rotation, and obliquity of the pelvis on the intra- and postoperative radiographs were calculated from Δinclination/anteversion using the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm.
RESULTS: The mean postoperative inclination/anteversion was 40° (± 8°)/23° (± 9°) with Δinclination and/or Δanteversion > ± 10° in 74 (21%). Intraoperatively, the pelvis was anteriorly tilted by a mean of 4° (± 10°), internally rotated by a mean of 1° (± 10°) and adducted by a mean of 1° (± 5°). Having Δinclination and/or Δanteversion > ± 10° was associated with a 3.5 odds ratio of having the acetabular component outside the target zone. A greater proportion of THAs that were undertaken with the patient in the lateral decubitus position had Δinclination and/or Δanteversion > ± 10° (35.3%, 54/153) compared with those in the supine position (4.8%, 8/167; p < 0.001). A greater number of acetabular components were within the target zone in THAs undertaken with the patient in the supine position (72%, 120/167), compared with those in the lateral decubitus position (44%, 67/153; p < 0.001). Intraoperatively, the pelvis was more anteriorly tilted (p < 0.001) and more internally rotated (p = 0.04) when the patient was in the lateral decubitus position.
CONCLUSION: The pelvic position is more reliable when the patient is in the supine position, leading to more consistent orientation of the acetabular component. Significant differences in pelvic tilt and rotation are seen with the patient in the lateral decubitus position. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1280-8.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30295537     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B10.BJJ-2018-0134.R1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  9 in total

Review 1.  Radiographic assessment of the cup orientation after total hip arthroplasty: a literature review.

Authors:  Jing-Xin Zhao; Xiu-Yun Su; Zhe Zhao; Ruo-Xiu Xiao; Li-Cheng Zhang; Pei-Fu Tang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-02

2.  Portable imageless navigation system and surgeon's estimate for accurate evaluation of acetabular cup orientation during total hip arthroplasty in supine position.

Authors:  Ryohei Takada; Tetsuya Jinno; Kazumasa Miyatake; Masanobu Hirao; Toshitaka Yoshii; Atsushi Okawa
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2020-01-10

3.  Acetabular and Femoral Component Positioning Using Direct Anterior Approach Versus Posterior Approach in Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Tarun Goyal; Arghya Kundu Choudhury; Souvik Paul; Tushar Gupta; Lakshmana Das
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 1.251

4.  Digitalized analyses of intraoperative acetabular component position using image-matching technique in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Shinya Kawahara; Toshihiko Hara; Taishi Sato; Kazuki Kitade; Takeshi Shimoto; Tetsuro Nakamura; Taro Mawatari; Hidehiko Higaki; Yasuharu Nakashima
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 5.853

5.  Pelvic Tilt Reduces the Accuracy of Acetabular Component Placement When Using a Portable Navigation System: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Hiroshi Asai; Yasuhiko Takegami; Taisuke Seki; Naoki Ishiguro
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-02-01

Review 6.  Can the use of an inclinometer improve acetabular cup inclination in total hip arthroplasty? A review of the literature.

Authors:  Bernard H van Duren; Joseph M Royeca; Conor M Cunningham; Jonathan N Lamb; Chris J Brew; Hemant Pandit
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 2.135

7.  Orthopedic Surgeons' Accuracy When Orienting an Acetabular Cup. A Comparison with Untrained Individuals.

Authors:  Jesús Moreta; Óscar Gayoso; Daniel Donaire-Hoyas; Jorge Roces-García; Jesús Gómez-Vallejo; Esther Moya-Gómez; David Raya-Roldán; Alberto Albert-Ullibarri; Fernando Marqués-López; Jorge Albareda
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-07-21       Impact factor: 2.948

Review 8.  Cup placement in primary total hip arthroplasty: how to get it right without navigation or robotics.

Authors:  Geert Meermans; George Grammatopoulos; Moritz Innmann; David Beverland
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2022-05-31

9.  An accelerometer-based navigation system provides acetabular cup orientation accuracy comparable to that of computed tomography-based navigation during total hip arthroplasty in the supine position.

Authors:  Tomonori Tetsunaga; Kazuki Yamada; Tomoko Tetsunaga; Tomoaki Sanki; Yoshi Kawamura; Toshifumi Ozaki
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 2.359

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.