Takaomi Kobayashi1, Tadatsugu Morimoto2, Tomohito Yoshihara2, Motoki Sonohata2, Charles Rivière3,4,5, Masaaki Mawatari2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, 5-1-1 Nabeshima, Saga, 849-8501, Japan. takaomi_920@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, 5-1-1 Nabeshima, Saga, 849-8501, Japan. 3. MSK Lab - Imperial College London, White City Campus, London, UK. 4. The Lister Hospital, Chelsea Bridge, London, UK. 5. Centre de L'Arthrose, Clinique du Sport, Bordeaux-Mérignac, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed (1) to investigate the relationship between pelvic incidence (PI) and the anatomical acetabular anteversion (AA) relative to the spino-pelvic tilt (SPT) plane (anatomical AASPT), relative to the anterior pelvic plane (anatomical AAAPP), and functional standing AA; and (2) to compare AA and the sagittal spino-pelvic parameters of lumbo-pelvic complex types 1 (PI ≤ 30°) and 2 (PI > 30°), in Japanese females with hip osteoarthritis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on 110 Japanese females with unilateral hip osteoarthritis. PI, standing lumbar lordosis (LL), standing SPT, anatomical AASPT, anatomical AAAPP, and functional standing AA were measured and calculated using radiographs and computed tomography. The PI-LL difference was defined as the mathematical difference between the PI and standing LL angles. Pearson's correlation test was used to measure the relationship between the PI and AA. Student's t test was used to compare spino-pelvic parameters between lumbo-pelvic complex type 1 (n = 24) and type 2 (n = 86). RESULTS: There was a significant relationship between the PI and anatomical AASPT (r = -0.532, p < 0.001), but no significant relationship between the PI and anatomical AAAPP (r = -0.021, p = 0.824) or functional standing AA (r = 0.104, p = 0.299). Lumbo-pelvic complex type 1 had a higher anatomical AASPT (22.4° ± 9.1° vs. 5.4° ± 15.1°, p < 0.001), similar anatomical AAAPP (15.0° ± 10.6° vs. 15.1° ± 15.3°, p = 0.981) and functional standing AA (12.4° ± 8.0° vs. 15.0° ± 14.1°, p = 0.254), a lower standing SPT (- 14.3° ± 11.0° vs. 13.7° ± 12.6°, p < 0.001), and a lower PI-LL difference (- 14.4° ± 18.5° vs. 6.4° ± 17.1°, p < 0.001) in comparison to lumbo-pelvic complex type 2. CONCLUSION: Our findings will help to improve the understanding of hip anatomy and its relationship with the standing spino-pelvic alignment in Japanese females with hip osteoarthritis.
PURPOSE: This study aimed (1) to investigate the relationship between pelvic incidence (PI) and the anatomical acetabular anteversion (AA) relative to the spino-pelvic tilt (SPT) plane (anatomical AASPT), relative to the anterior pelvic plane (anatomical AAAPP), and functional standing AA; and (2) to compare AA and the sagittal spino-pelvic parameters of lumbo-pelvic complex types 1 (PI ≤ 30°) and 2 (PI > 30°), in Japanese females with hip osteoarthritis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on 110 Japanese females with unilateral hip osteoarthritis. PI, standing lumbar lordosis (LL), standing SPT, anatomical AASPT, anatomical AAAPP, and functional standing AA were measured and calculated using radiographs and computed tomography. The PI-LL difference was defined as the mathematical difference between the PI and standing LL angles. Pearson's correlation test was used to measure the relationship between the PI and AA. Student's t test was used to compare spino-pelvic parameters between lumbo-pelvic complex type 1 (n = 24) and type 2 (n = 86). RESULTS: There was a significant relationship between the PI and anatomical AASPT (r = -0.532, p < 0.001), but no significant relationship between the PI and anatomical AAAPP (r = -0.021, p = 0.824) or functional standing AA (r = 0.104, p = 0.299). Lumbo-pelvic complex type 1 had a higher anatomical AASPT (22.4° ± 9.1° vs. 5.4° ± 15.1°, p < 0.001), similar anatomical AAAPP (15.0° ± 10.6° vs. 15.1° ± 15.3°, p = 0.981) and functional standing AA (12.4° ± 8.0° vs. 15.0° ± 14.1°, p = 0.254), a lower standing SPT (- 14.3° ± 11.0° vs. 13.7° ± 12.6°, p < 0.001), and a lower PI-LL difference (- 14.4° ± 18.5° vs. 6.4° ± 17.1°, p < 0.001) in comparison to lumbo-pelvic complex type 2. CONCLUSION: Our findings will help to improve the understanding of hip anatomy and its relationship with the standing spino-pelvic alignment in Japanese females with hip osteoarthritis.
Authors: C Rivière; J-Y Lazennec; C Van Der Straeten; E Auvinet; J Cobb; S Muirhead-Allwood Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 2.256
Authors: Jeremy J Gebhart; Jonathan J Streit; Asheesh Bedi; Charles A Bush-Joseph; Shane J Nho; Michael J Salata Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2014-09-08 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: P Sautet; H Giorgi; P Chabrand; P Tropiano; J-N Argenson; S Parratte; B Blondel Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 2.256
Authors: Aaron J Buckland; Laviel Fernandez; Andrew J Shimmin; Jonathan V Bare; Stephen J McMahon; Jonathan M Vigdorchik Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2019-06-22 Impact factor: 4.757