INTRODUCTION. In orthopedic surgery, the lower limb alignment defined by the HKA parameter i.e. the angle between the hip, knee and ankle centers, is a crucial clinical criterion used for the achievement of several surgeries. It can be intraoperatively determined with Computer Assisted Orthopedic Surgery (CAOS) systems by computing the 3D location of these joint centres. The hip centre used for the computation of the HKA is defined by the experts as the anatomical centre of the femoral head. However, except for Total Hip Replacement procedure, the hip joint is not accessible and the hip center is computed using functional methods. The two most common are the Least Moving Point (LMP) and the Pivoting (PIV). MATERIALS AND METHODS. We have analysed on six cadaveric lower limbs the intra-observer variability of both the anatomical and the functional hip centres. The differences between the HKAs angle obtained with the anatomical hip centre (HCANAT) and those obtained with the functional hip centres coming from the LMP (HCLMP) and the PIV (HCPIV) algorithms have also been analysed. RESULTS. The intra-observer variability was on average (standard deviation) 0.9(0.6)mm, 9(5.2)mm and 7.5(4)mm for respectively the HCANAT, HCLMP and the HCPIV variations. The average impact on the HKA was 1° and 0.8 ° respectively for HCLMP and HCPIV with a maximum of 4°. DISCUSSION. Several papers in the literature have studied the accuracy and the robustness of methods allowing CAOS systems to determine the functional hip centre. All of these studies have been performed with simulated data. This study shows results coming from in-vitro data. The results concerning the intra-observer variability shows that the procedure is very robust and reproducible for the determination of HCANAT. However, functional methods are much less reproducible even if the Pivoting method seems to be a little better. Given these results, the impact of the functional methods on the HKA has been analysed. We have therefore compared the HKA obtained with HCANAT with those obtained with HCLMP and HCPIV. The results are extremely encouraging since, despite the intra-observer variability, the differences between the anatomical and the functional HKAs are, on average, less than 1° with a maximum inferior to 4°. The impact on the HKA is therefore limited and the accuracy of the functional methods to assess the HKA are sufficient regarding the clinical needs

Introduction:. Acetabular revision Jumbo cups are used in revision hip surgeries to allow for large bone to implant contact and stability. However, jumbo cups may also result in hip center elevation and instability. They may also protrude through anterior wall leading to ilopsoas tendinitis. Methods:. The study was conducted using two methods:. Computer simulation study. 265 pelvic CT scans consisting of 158 males and 107 females were converted to virtual 3-dimensional bones. The average native acetabular diameter was 52.0 mm, SD = 4.0 mm (males in 52.4 mm, SD = 2.8 mm and 46.4 mm, SD = 2.6 mm in females). Images were analyzed by custom CT analytical software (SOMA™ V.3.2). 1. and over-sized reaming was simulated. Four distinct points, located in and around the acetabular margins, were used to determine the reamer sphere. Points 1, 2, 3 were located at the inferior and inferior-medial acetabular margins, and Point 4 was located superiorly and posteriorly in the acetabulum to simulate a bony defect in this location, Point 4 was placed at 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50% and 60% of the distance from the superior – posterior margin of the acetabular rim to the sciatic notch to simulate bony defects of increasing size. (Figure 1). Radiographical study. Retrospective chart review of patient records for all cementless acetabular revisions utilizing jumbo cups between January 1, 1998 and March 30, 2012 at UCFS (98 patients with 57 men, 41 women). Jumbo cups: ≥66 mm in males; <62 mm in females. Reaming was directed inferiorly to the level of the obturator foramen to place the inferior edge of the jumbo cup at the inferior acetabulum. To determine the vertical position of the hip center, a circle was first made around both the jumbo and the contralateral acetabular surfaces using Phillips iSite PACS software. The center of this circle was assumed to correspond to the “hip center”. The height of the hip center was estimated by measuring the height of a perpendicular line arising from the interteardrop line (TL) and ending at the hip center. Results:. The computer simulation and radiographic analysis deomonstrated similar results. The computer simulation predicted that the hip center shifted superiorly and anteriorly as the reamer size increased. The hip center shifted 0.27 mm superiorly and 0.02 mm anteriorly for every millimeter in diameter increased for the reaming. (Figure 2) Anterior column bone removal was increased 0.86 mm for every 1 mm of reamer size increase. (Figure 3). Results of radiographical study is shown in Table bellow:. Discussion:. Use of a jumbo cup in revision THA results in elevation of the hip center. Therefore a longer femoral head may be needed to compensate for hip center elevation when a jumbo cup is used. Reaming for a jumbo cup can also result in loss of anterior bone stock and protrusion of the cup anteriorly which may cause iliopsoas tendonitis

The hip centre (HC) in Computer Assisted Orthopedic Surgery (CAOS) can be determined either with anatomical (AA) or functional approaches (FA). AA is considered as the reference while FA compute the hip centre of rotation (CoR). Four main FA can be used in CAOS: the Gammage, Halvorsen, pivot, and least-moving point (LMP) methods. The goal of this paper is to evaluate and compare with an in-vitro experiment (a) the four main FA for the HC determination, and (b) the impact on the HKA. The experiment has been performed on six cadavers. A CAOS software application has been developed for the acquisitions of (a) the hip rotation motion, (b) the anatomical HC, and (c) the HKA angle. Two studies have been defined allowing (a) the evaluation of the precision and the accuracy of the four FA with respect to the AA, and (b) the impact on the HKA angle. For the pivot, LMP, Gammage and Halvorsen methods respectively: (1) the maximum precision reach 14.2, 22.8, 111.4 and 132.5 mm; (2) the maximum accuracy reach 23.6, 40.7, 176.6 and 130.3 mm; (3) the maximum error of the frontal HKA is 2.5°, 3.7°, 12.7° and 13.3°; and (4) the maximum error of the sagittal HKA is 2.3°, 4.3°, 5.9°, 6.1°. The pivot method is the most precise and accurate approach for the HC localisation and the HKA computation

Functional approaches for the localisation of the hip centre (HC) are widely used in Computer Assisted Orthopedic Surgery (CAOS). These methods aim to compute the HC defined as the centre of rotation (CoR) of the femur with respect to the pelvis. The Least-Moving-Point (LMP) method is one approach which consists in detecting the point that moves the least during the circumduction motion. The goal of this paper is to highlight the limits of the native LMP (nLMP) and to propose a modified version (mLMP). A software application has been developed allowing the simulation of a circumduction motion of a hip in order to generate the required data for the computation of the HC. Two tests have been defined in order to assess and compare both LMP methods with respect to (1) the camera noise (CN) and (2) the acetabular noise (AN). The mLMP and nLMP error is respectively: (1) 0.5±0.2mm and 9.3±1.4mm for a low CN, 21.7±3.6mm and 184.7±13.1mm for a high CN, and (2) 2.2±1.2mm and 0.5±0.3mm for a low AN, 35.2±18.5mm and 13.0±8.2mm for a high AN. In conclusion, mLMP is more robust and accurate than the nLMP algorithm

The location of the hip joint center (HJC) allows correct prosthesis aligning and positioning in Computer-Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery (CAOS) applications. For the kinematic HJC localisation, the femur is moved around the pelvis with ad hoc motion trials (“pivoting”). The “Pivoting algorithm” [Siston et al., J Biomech 39 (2006) 125–130] is the functional state-of-the-art method for the hip center localisation. A source of systematic error in HJC localisation algorithms is represented by the pelvis motion during the pivoting. In computer assisted total knee arthroplasty applications, the pelvis pose is not acquired during passive movements. In motion capture applications, Kalman Filter (KF) methodology was used to estimate the pose of hidden segment for rigid body pose estimation. The purpose of this study was to validate the accuracy and robustness of a Kalman Filter algorithm, applied to a state space formulation based on two links model of the hip joint, to track the HJC position during passive movements of the articulation in CAOS procedure. The state space model describes femur and pelvis kinematics under the hypothesis of non-laxity of the articulation (ideal spherical joint). The first link models the femoral bone, while the second link models the pelvis. The femur is tracked with a Dynamic Reference Frame (DRF) attached to the distal end, composed by four active markers, while the pelvis is tracked attaching a marker to it. The kinematic relations between the state vector and the observations are non linear function. The state space has been implemented with II order linear dynamics. The position of HJC in the Femur Reference Frame is modeled with non-dynamic state variables. In order to validate the proposed algorithm, a physical model of the hip joint (femur and pelvis) was realised using SawBones models. An active optical localisation system (Certus, NDI, Ontario, Canada) was used in order to track the coordinates of two DRF rigidly connected on each segment and the coordinates of a marker attached to the pelvis segment (on the Anterior Superior Iliac Spine ASIS). The pelvis phantom is locked on a Mass-Spring-Damper platform with 2 DoFs, which mimics soft tissues behaviour. During the pivoting motion, the poses of the femur DRF and the positions of the ASIS marker of the pelvis DRF were collected. The acquired data were the observable outputs to the KF algorithm, which computes an estimation of the state parameters. The accuracy is evaluated as the Euclidean distance between respectively the estimated and Gold Standard HJC positions in FRF. The KF method performances were compared with the “Pivoting” algorithm. The localisation errors computed for both the methodologies were evaluated with respect to the HJC translation, to the Range Of pivoting Motion (ROM) and to the velocity of femur DRF trajectory (Pearson correlation analysis). The positive correlation coefficients between HJC translation and the localization errors result statistically significant (p<0.01) for both “Pivoting” (correlation index equal to 0.838) and KF (correlation index equal to 0.415) algorithms; while a negative (correlation index equal to −0.355) and positive (correlation index equal to 0.263) correlation respectively for ROM and Velocity is computed as statistically significant (p<0.05) only for KF algorithm errors. Statistically significant difference (Kruskal-Wallis, p<0.01) between “Pivoting” [median 26.71 mm and inter-quartile range (24.04, 32.18)mm] and KF [median 11.71mm and inter-quartile range (7.74, 18.82)mm] algorithms was assessed for HJC translation greater than 7 mm. The new method KF proved to be applicable in current CAOS systems. The substantial improvement of KF method is the possibility of reducing the systematical error, caused by pelvis motion during passive movement of the femur, to compute HJC position. On the other hand, tracking the HJC trajectory in real time is a nontrivial task and requires a very accurate filter parameters tuning. Further tests must be made to estimate the in-vivo range of HJC translation during passive pivoting movements and evaluate the performances of KF method with respect to others state-of-the-art methods

INTRODUCTION. The restoration of the anatomical hip rotation center (HRC) has a major influence on the longevity of hip prostheses. Deviations from the HRC of the anatomical joint after total hip arthroplasty (THA) can lead to increased hip joint forces, early wear or loosening of the implant. The contact conditions of acetabular press-fit cups after implantation, including the degree of press-fit, the existence of a polar gap and cup orientation, may affect the HRC restoration, and therefore implant stability. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of acetabular press-fit, polar gap and cup orientation on HRC restoration during THA. METHODS. THAs were performed by an experienced orthopaedic surgeon in full cadaveric models simulating real patient surgery (n=7). Acetabular cups with a Porocoat™ (n=3) and Gription™ surface coating (n=4) were implanted (DePuy Synthes, Leeds, UK). Computed tomography (CT) scans prior to surgery, as well as after reaming and implantation of press-fit cups were used to calculate the HRC displacement. After aligning the pelves in the anterior pelvic plane, 3D reconstruction of the HRC at each stage was performed by fitting spheres to the femoral head, the reamed cavity and the inserted cup. 3D surface models of the cups were generated using a laser scanner and were registered to the CT images. The effective press-fit was calculated using the diameters of spheres, fitted to the cavity prior to cup insertion and to the outer cup coating. The polar gap was defined as the difference between the outer cup surface and the subchondral bone at the cup pole. Anteversion and abduction angles were calculated as difference between the cup planes and the sagittal and transverse plane, respectively. RESULTS. A medial (6.4±1.6mm), superior (5.1±1.5mm) and posterior (3.0±1.4mm) displacement of the HRC after reaming was measured. A significant inferior shift of the HRC could be measured after cup implantation (p=0.043). No significant influence of the coating design on the HRC shift could be observed. The shift of the HRC back towards the anatomical HRC was highly correlated to the degree of polar gap (R. 2. =0.928, p<0.001) and a trend towards an association with effective press-fit was observed (R. 2. =0.536, p=0.061). The cup angles had no influence on the shift of the HRC, but a high variability in cup anteversion (20.7° to 61.8°) was observed. DISCUSSION. The study suggests that increasing the press-fit and polar gap improves the restoration of the anatomical HRC. Since increasing the degree of press-fit could also lead to higher stresses and an increased fracture risk, future work will study how the acetabular contact conditions influence both primary implant stability and fracture risk, in order to establish an optimal HRC reconstruction to maximize implant longevity

Surgical management of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) aims to preserve the native hip, restore joint function, and delay the onset of osteoarthritis. However, it is unclear how surgery affects joint mechanics and hip joint stability. The aim was to examine the contributions of each surgical stage (i.e., intact cam hip, capsulotomy, cam resection, capsular repair) towards hip joint centre of rotation and microinstability. Twelve fresh, frozen cadaveric hips (n = 12 males, age = 44 ± 9 years, BMI = 23 ± 3 kg/m2) were skeletonized to the capsule and included in this study. All hips indicated cam morphology on CT data (axial α = 63 ± 6°, radial α = 74 ± 4°) and were mounted onto a six-DOF industrial robot (TX90, Stäubli). The robot positioned each hip in four sagittal angles: 1) Extension, 2) Neutral 0°, 3) Flexion 30°, and 4) Flexion 90°, and performed internal and external hip rotations until a 5-Nm torque was reached in each direction, while recording the hip joint centre's neutral path of translation. After the (i) intact hip was tested, each hip underwent a series of surgical stages and was retested after each stage: (ii) T-capsulotomy (incised lateral iliofemoral capsular ligament), (iii) cam resection (removed morphology), and (iv) capsular repair (sutured portal incisions). Eccentricity of the hip joint centre was quantified by the microinstability index (MI = difference in rotational foci / femoral head radius). Repeated measures ANOVA and post-hoc paired t-tests compared the within-subject differences in hip joint centre and microinstability index, between the testing stages (CI = 95%, SPSS v.24, IBM). At the Extension and Neutral positions, the hip joint centre rotated concentrically after each surgical stage. At Flexion 30°, the hip joint centre shifted inferolaterally during external rotation after capsulotomy (p = 0.009), while at Flexion 90°, the hip joint centre further shifted inferolaterally during external rotation (p = 0.005) and slightly medially during internal rotation after cam resection, compared to the intact stages. Consequently, microinstability increased after the capsulotomy at Flexion 30° (MI = +0.05, p = 0.003) and substantially after cam resection at Flexion 90° (MI = +0.07, p = 0.007). Capsular repair was able to slightly restrain the rotational centre and decrease microinstability at the Flexion 30° and 90° positions (MI = −0.03 and −0.04, respectively). Hip microinstability occurred at higher amplitudes of flexion, with the cam resection providing more intracapsular volume and further lateralizing the hip joint during external rotation. Removing the cam deformity and impingement with the chondrolabral junction also medialized the hip during internal rotation, which can restore more favourable joint loading mechanics and stability. These findings support the pathomechanics of cam FAI and suggest that iatrogenic microinstability may be due to excessive motions, prior to post-operative restoration of static (capsular) and dynamic (muscle) stability. In efforts to limit microinstability, proper nonsurgical management and rehabilitation are essential, while activities that involve larger amplitudes of hip flexion and external rotation should be avoided immediately after surgery

Introduction. The correct anteversion of the acetabular cup is critical to achieve optimal outcome after total hip arthroplasty. While number of method has been described to measure the anteversion in plane anteroposterior and lateral radiograph, it is still controversial which method provides best anteversion measurement. While many of the previous studies used CT scan to validate the anteversion measured in plane anteroposterior radiograph, this may cause potential bias as the anteversion measured in CT scan reflects true anteversion while the anteversion measurement methods in plane radiograph are design to measure the planar anteversion. Thus, in the current study, we tried to find the optimal anteversion measurement method free from the previously described bias. Material and method. Custom made cup model was developed which enables change in anteversion and inclination. Simple radiograph was taken with the cup in 10° to 70° degree of inclination at 10° increments and for each inclination angle, anteversion was corrected from 0° to 30° at 5° increments. The radiograph was taken with the beam directed at the center of the cup (mimicking hip centered anteroposterior radiograph) and at 9cm medial to the cup (mimicking pelvis anteroposterior radiograph). The measurements were done by two orthopaedic surgeons using methods described by 1) Pradhan et al, 2) Lewinak et al, 3) Widmer et al, and 4) Liaw et al. For each measurements, the anteversion were compared with the actual anteversion. Result. Interoverver correlation (kappa value) were high in all measurements ranging 0.988 to 0.998. Regardless of how the radiograph was taken, Pradhan method was the most accurate measurement method showing difference of 2.17° ± 1.69° and −2.5° ± 1.93° compare to the actual anteversion respectively for hip centered radiograph and pelvis anteroposterior radiograph. The Widmer method showed the least accuracy (pelvis AP : −6.75° ± 4.62°, hip centered AP : −14.84° ± 4.36°). However, when the anteversion were measured in the safe zone with the inclination in 30° to 50° Liaw's method in hip centered radiograph showed the highest accuracy (1.63° ± 1.4°). Conclusion. The study indicates that the Pradhan's method may provide the most accurate anteversion measurement. However, with the hip in 30° to 50° inclination, Liaw's method measured from hip centred radiograph will provide most accurate anteversion measurement

Background. It is technically challenging to restore hip rotation center exactly in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with end-stage osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) due to the complicated acetabular morphology changes. In this study, we developed a new method to restore hip rotation center exactly and rapidly in THA with the assistance of three dimensional (3-D) printing technology. Methods. Seventeen patients (21 hips) with end-stage osteoarthritis secondary to DDH who underwent THA were included in this study. Simulated operations were performed on 3-D printed hip models for preoperative planning. The Harris fossa and acetabular notches were recognized and restored to locate acetabular center. The agreement on the size of acetabular cup and bone defect between simulated operations and actual operations were analyzed. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were recorded and evaluated. Results. The sizes of the acetabular cup of simulated operations on 3-D printing models showed a high rate of coincidence with the actual sizes in the operations(ICC value=0.930) There was no significant difference statistically between the sizes of bone defect in simulated operations and the actual sizes of bone defect in THA(t value=0.03 P value=0.97). The average Harris score of the patients was improved from (38.33±6.07) preoperatively to the last follow-up (88.61±3.44) postoperatively. The mean vertical and horizontal distances of hip rotation center on the pelvic radiographs were restored to (15.12 ± 1.25 mm and (32.49±2.83) mm respectively. No case presented dislocation or radiological signs of loosening until last follow-up. Conclusions. The application of 3-D printing technology facilitates orthopedists to recognize the morphology of Harris fossa and acetabular notches, locate the acetabular center and restore the hip rotation center rapidly and accurately

Introduction. Bulk bone grafting of the cup is commonly used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for developmental dysplasia. However, it carries a risk of the graft collapse in the mid-term or long-term results. The purpose of this study is to describe our new bulk bone grafting technique and review the radiographic and clinical results. Patients and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 85 hips in 74 patients who had undergone bulk bone grafting in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia between 2008 and 2013. We excluded patients who had any previous surgeries or performed THA with the femoral shortening osteotomy. According to the Crowe classification, 4 hips were classified as Type 1, 28 as Type 2, 35 as Type 3, and 18 as Type 4. Follow-up was at a mean of 4.0 years (1 to 6.1). The surgery was performed using the direct anterior approach on a standard surgical table. The acetabulum was reamed for as close to the original acetabulum as possible. The pressfit cementless cup was impacted into the original acetabulum. After the pressfit fixation of the cup was achieved, two or three screws were used to reinforce the fixation. The superior defect of the acetabulum was packed with sufficient amount of morselized bone graft. Then, the bulk bone was placed on the morselized bone graft and fixed with one screw. Post-operatively, there were no restrictions to movement or position. On the first day after surgery, the patient was allowed to walk with full weight-bearing. We measured the height of the hip center from the interteardrop line and the pelvic height on anteroposterior roentgenograms of the pelvis and calculated the ratio of the hip center to the pelvic height. We defined the anatomical hip center as the height of the center less than 15% of the pelvic height. Results. The mean height of the hip center was 10.2 (4.1∼18.0)% of the pelvic height and the 81 (95.2%) cups were placed within the anatomical hip center. We observed no collapsed grafts, no severe absorption of the grafts, and no migration of the cup at the last follow-up. Conclusion. In our technique, there is no concern of the bulk bone graft collapse even in the long-term results, because the cup is not supported by the bulk bone graft but by the host bone with the pressfit and additional screws. Moreover, 95.2% of all cups were placed within the anatomical hip center. In conclusion, our new bulk bone graft technique would be simple to perform and an excellent option for the reconstruction of the acetabulum in patients with severe dysplasia

Introduction. Bulk bone grafting is commonly used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for developmental dysplasia. However, it is a technically demanding surgery with several critical issues, including graft resorption, graft collapse, and cup loosening. The purpose of this study is to describe our new bone grafting technique and review the radiographic and clinical results. Patients and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 105 hips in 89 patients who had undergone covered bone grafting (CBG) in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia. We excluded patients who had any previous surgeries or underwent THA with a femoral shortening osteotomy. According to the Crowe classification, 6 hips were classified as group I, 39 as group II, 40 as group III, and 20 as group IV. Follow-up was at a mean of 4.1 (1 ∼ 6.9) years. The surgery was performed using the direct anterior approach. The acetabulum was reamed as close to the original acetabulum as possible. The pressfit cementless cup was impacted into the original acetabulum. After pressfit fixation of the cup was achieved, several screws were used to reinforce the fixation. Indicating factor for using CBG was a large defect where the acetabular roof angle was more than 45 degrees and the uncovered cup was more than 2 cm (Fig.1). The superior defect of the acetabulum was packed with a sufficient amount of morselized bone using bone dust from the acetabular reamers. Then, the grafted morselized bone was covered with a bone plate from the femoral head. The bone plate was fixed with one screw to compact the morselized bone graft. The patient was allowed to walk bearing full weight immediately after surgery. We measured the height of the hip center from the teardrop line and the pelvic height on anteroposterior roentgenograms of the pelvis and calculated the ratio of the hip center to the pelvic height. We defined the anatomical hip center as the height of the center less than 15 % of the pelvic height, which was nearly equal to 30 mm, because the mean pelvic height was 210 mm. Results. The mean height of the hip center was 9.8 (4.1∼18.0) % of the pelvic height and the 101 (96.2%) cups were placed within the anatomical hip center. Radiographically, in all patients, the host-graft interface became distinct and the new cortical bone in the lateral part of the plate bone appeared within 1 year after surgery (Fig.2, 3). We observed no absorption of the plate bone graft and no migration of the cup at the last follow-up. Conclusion. CBG technique is simple, because the bone graft is always performed after the pressfit of the cup is achieved. Moreover, patients require no partial weight bearing postoperatively, because the cup is supported by the host bone with the pressfit and additional screws. The CBG technique would be an excellent option for the reconstruction of the acetabulum in patients with severe dysplasia to avoid a high hip center and bulky bone grafting

It has been reported that 60-85% of patients who undergo PAO have concomitant intraarticular pathology that cannot be addressed with PAO alone. Currently, there are limited diagnostic tools to determine which patients would benefit from hip arthroscopy at the time of PAO to address intra-articular pathology. This study aims to see if preoperative PROMs scores measured by IHOT-33 scores have predictive value in whether intra-articular pathology is addressed during PAO + scope. The secondary aim is to see how often surgeons at high-volume hip preservation centers address intra-articular pathology if a scope is performed during the same anesthesia event. A randomized, prospective Multicenter trial was performed on patients who underwent PAO and hip arthroscopy to treat hip dysplasia from 2019 to 2020. Preoperative PROMs and intraoperative findings and procedures were recorded and analyzed. A total of 75 patients, 84% Female, and 16% male, with an average age of 27 years old, were included in the study. Patients were randomized to have PAO alone 34 patients vs. PAO + arthroscopy 41 patients during the same anesthesia event. The procedures performed, including types of labral procedures and chondroplasty procedures, were recorded. Additionally, a two-sided student T-test was used to evaluate the difference in means of preoperative IHOT score among patients for whom a labral procedure was performed versus no labral procedure. A total of 82% of patients had an intra-articular procedure performed at the time of hip arthroscopy. 68% of patients who had PAO + arthroscopy had a labral procedure performed. The most common labral procedure was a labral refixation which was performed in 78% of patients who had a labral procedure performed. Femoral head-neck junction chondroplasty was performed in 51% of patients who had an intra-articular procedure performed. The mean IHOT score was 29.3 in patients who had a labral procedure performed and 33.63 in those who did not have a labral procedure performed P- value=0.24. Our findings demonstrate preoperative IHOT-33 scores were not predictive in determining whether intra-articular labral pathology was addressed at the time of surgery. Additionally, we found that if labral pathology was addressed, labral refixation was the most common repair performed. This study also provides valuable information on what procedures high-volume hip preservation centers are performing when performing PAO + arthroscopy

Introduction. The goal of total hip arthroplasty (THA) should be to reconstruct the acetabulum by positioning the hip center as close as possible to the anatomical hip center. However, the true position of the anatomic hip center can be difficult to determine during surgery on an individual basis. In 2005, we designed, produced an acetabular reaming guide, and clinically used to enable cup placement in the ideal anatomical position. This study was examined the accuracy the reaming guide for THA in prospective study. Methods. This guide was applied consecutive 230 patients in primary THA. During planning, the distance from the acetabular edge to the reaming center and from the center to the perpendicular of the inter-teardrop line was measured on an anteroposterior (AP) X-ray. The reaming guide was adjusted depend on the reaming center by based planning. Acetabular reaming was performed with the process reamer. Results. At planning, the position of the hip center was 18.1 mm in the vertical offset (VO) and 29.6 mm in the horizontal offset (HO). After surgery, the position of the hip center had a VO of 18.1 mm and an HO of 29.9 mm. The absolute error between planning and post-operation was a VO of 2.7 mm and an HO of 2.9 mm. Overall, 199 cases (86.5%) had an HO error of less than 5 mm and 204 cases (89.6%) had a VO error of less than 5 mm. The vertical height from the teardrop line to the inferior edge of the acetabular cup was 0.5 ± 3.5 mm. Conclusion. The new reaming guide was closely reproduced the preoperative planning position in this prospective study. Our original acetabular reaming guide is a very useful tool for performing reaming during THA and for ensuring accurate cup placement at the anatomical hip center

Introduction. Previous research defines the existence of a “safe zone” (SZ) pertaining to acetabular cup implantation during total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is believed that if the cup is implanted at 40°±10° inclination and 15°±10° anteversion, risk of dislocation is reduced. However, recent studies have documented that even when the acetabular cup is placed within the SZ, high incidence dislocation and instability remains due to the combination of patient-specific configuration, cup diameter, head size, and surgical approach. The SZ only investigates the angular orientation of the cup, ignoring translational location. Translational location of the cup can cause a mismatch between anatomical hip center and implanted cup center, which has not been widely explored. Objective. The objective of this study is to define a zone within which the implanted joint center can be altered with respect to the anatomical joint center but will not increase the likelihood of post-operative hip separation or dislocation. Methods. A theoretical forward solution hip model, previously validated by telemetric devices and fluoroscopy data of existing implants, was used for analysis. The model allows for modifications of implant geometries/placement and soft tissue resection to simulate various surgical conditions. For the baseline simulation, the cup center was matched to the anatomical hip joint center, calculated as the center of the best fit sphere mapping the acetabulum, and the orientation of the cup was 40°/15° (inclination/anteversion). Keeping cup orientation the same, the location of the cup was moved in 1 mm increments in all directions to identify the region where a mismatch between the two centers did not lead to separation or instability in the joint. Results. During both swing and stance phase, when the acetabular cup was placed within the optimal conic with a slant height of 5±1 mm, no hip instability or dislocation risk occurred. As the acetabular cup was translated to the boundary of the optimal conic, hip instability increased. When the acetabular cup was placed at the boundary of the optimal conic, up to 2 mm of hip separation in the lateral direction occurred during swing phase, resulting in a decrease in contact area and an increase in contact stress. As the cup was placed outside the optimal conic, severe edge loading and hip separation up to 3.5 mm occurred during swing phase. In general, this resulted in large increases in cup stress, resulting in increased risk of wear leading to early complications. Discussion. This study introduces the concept of an optimal conic in the hip joint space to reduce the incidence of dislocation and hip instability after THA. Placing the cup center within the optimal conic reduces hip instability. Moving the cup further from the anatomical hip center increases the occurrence of hip instability. Cup placement within the optimal conic and angular SZ can lead to better postoperative outcomes. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

The aim was to identify the acetabular center, fix the acetabular implant, and reconstruct the hip rotation center using the residual Harris fossa and acetabular notch as anatomical markers during revision hip arthroplasty. Osteolysis is commonly found in the acetabulum during hip arthroplasty revision. It causes extensive defects and malformation of the anatomical structure, making correct fixation of a hip prosthesis difficult. We studied the relations of the anatomical positions between the Harris fossa and acetabular notch and the acetabular center (Fig. 1). Vertical distance from the hip rotation center to the teardrop connection and horizontal distance from the hip rotation center to the teardrop were measured on preoperative and postoperative radiographs. Vertical distance increased from 14.22±3.39 mm preoperatively to 32.64±4.51 mm postoperatively (t=3.65, P<0.05) and the horizontal distance from 25.13±3.46 mm to 32.87±4.73 mm (t=2.72, P<0.05). Altogether, 28 patients underwent revision hip arthroplasty based on the Paprosky classification for bone loss. The anatomical hip center was identified using the residual Harris fossa and acetabular notch as anatomical markers during revision hip arthroplasty. Based on these relations, we were able to place the hip prosthesis correctly. After surgery, restoration of the anatomical hip center was accomplished based on data obtained from radiographs(Fig.2 and Fig.3)

To develop a useful surgical navigation system, accurate determination of bone coordinates and thorough understanding of the knee kinematics are important. In this study, we have verified our algorithm for determination of bone coordinates in a cadaver study using skeletal markers, and at the same time, we also attempted to obtain a better understanding of the knee kinematics. The research was performed at the Medical Simulation Center of Tzu Chi University. Optical measurement system (Polaris® Vicra®, Northern Digital Inc.) was used, and reflective skeletal markers were placed over the iliac crest, femur shaft, and tibia shaft of the same limb. Two methods were used to determine the hip center; one is by circumduction of the femur, assuming it pivoted at the hip center. The other method was to partially expose the head of femur through anterior hip arthrotomy, and to calculate the centre of head from the surface coordinates obtained with a probe. The coordinate system of femur was established by direct probing the bony landmarks of distal femur through arthrotomy of knee joint, including the medial and lateral epicondyle, and the Whiteside line. The tibial axis was determined by the centre of tibia plateau localised via direct probing, and the centre of ankle joint calculated by the midpoint between bilateral malleoli. Repeated passive flexion and extension of knee joint was performed, and the mechanical axis as well as the rotation axis were calculated during knee motion. A very small amount of motion was detected from the iliac crest, and all the data were adjusted at first. There was a discrepancy of about 16.7mm between the two methods in finding the hip centre, and the position found by the first method was located more proximally. When comparing the epicondylar axis to the rotation axis of the tibia around knee joint, there was a difference of 2.46 degrees. The total range of motion for the knee joint measured in this study was 0∼144 degrees. The mechanical axis was found changing in an exponential pattern from 0 degrees to undetermined at 90 degrees of flexion, and then returned to zero again. Taking the value of 5 degrees as an acceptable range of error, the calculated mechanical axis exceeded this value when knee flexion angle was between 60∼120 degrees. The discrepancy between the hip centres calculated from the two methods suggested that the pivoting point of the femur head during hip motion might not be at the center of femur head, and the former location seemed closer to the surface of head at the weight bearing site. Under such circumstances, the mechanical axis obtained through circumduction of the thigh might be 1∼2 degrees different from that obtained through the actual center of femur head. During knee flexion, the mechanical axis also changed gradually, and this could be due to laxity of knee joint, or due to intrinsic valgus/varus alignment. However, the value became unreliable when the knee was at a flexion angle of 60∼120 degrees, and this should be taken into account during navigation surgery

Introduction. Natural population variation in femoral morphology results in a large range of offsets, anteversion angles and lengths. During total hip arthroplasty, accurate restoration of hip biomechanics is essential to achieve good functional results. One option is to restore the anatomic hip rotation center. Alternatively, medializing the rotation center and compensating by increasing the femoral offset, reduces acetabular contact forces and increases the abductor lever arm. We investigated the ability of two cemented stem systems to restore hip biomechanics in an anatomic and medialized way. We compared an undersized “Exeter-type” of stem with three offset options and 18 sizes (CPT, Zimmer), to a line-to-line “Kerboul-type” of stem with proportional offset and 12 sizes (Centris, Mathys). Methods. Thirty CT scans of whole femora were segmented and the hip rotation center, proximal femoral axis and femoral length were determined with Mimics and 3-matic (Materialise). Using scripting functionality in the software, CAD design files of both stems were automatically sized and aligned along the proximal femoral axis to restore an anatomical and a 5 mm medialized hip rotation center. Stem size and position could be fine-tuned manually. The maximum distances between the prosthetic (PRC), the anatomic (ARC) and the medialized hip rotation center (MRC) were calculated (Fig. 1). Variations in femoral offset (ΔFO), anteroposterior (ΔAP) and proximodistal distance (ΔPD) were analyzed. Finally, the number of cases where the hip rotation center could be restored within 5 mm was reported. Results. Both implants allowed restoring the ARC accurately (mean distance PRC-ARC: CPT 0.97±0.88 mm, Centris 1.66±1.59 mm; mean difference ΔFO: CPT 0.09±0.19 mm, Centris 0.11±0.29 mm; mean difference ΔAP: CPT 0.12±1.22°, Centris 0.27±1.78 mm, mean difference ΔPD: CPT 0.04±0.44 mm, Centris 0.49±1.35 mm). The CPT stem allowed restoring the PRC within 5 mm of the ARC in all cases (max. 4.31 mm), whereas the Centris stem achieved this in only 28/30 hips (max. 6.72 mm) (Fig. 2). Aiming for a MRC was less satisfactory with both stems (mean distance PRC-MRC: CPT 1.38±1.63 mm, Centris 3.61±2.73 mm; mean difference ΔFO: CPT 0.09±0.10 mm, Centris 0.06±0.35 mm; mean difference ΔAP: CPT 0.17±2.02 mm, Centris 2.58±2.68 mm, mean difference ΔDP; CPT 0.28±0.67 mm, Centris 1.98±1.66 mm). The CPT stem allowed restoring the PRC within 5 mm of the MRC in 29/30 cases (max. 8.09 mm), whereas the Centris stem achieved this in only 25/30 cases (max. 11.15 mm) (Fig. 3). Discussion. Although both stem systems allowed restoring hip biomechanics accurately in most cases, the CPT system was superior to the Centris stem for achieving both ARC and MRC. This could be explained by more implant sizes (18 vs. 12) and undersized stems offering more freedom to correct version. Although medializing the hip rotation center offers biomechanical advantages, both stems had more difficulties achieving this. In some cases, differences between aimed and planned rotation centers were close to 1 cm which might negatively impact on clinical outcome. As such, to avoid suboptimal reconstructions with the available implants, templating is mandatory especially when aiming at a medialized reconstruction strategy

Introduction. In DDH cases often have high anteversion. They also often have high hip center. THA for those cases sometimes requires subtrochanteric derotational/shortening osteotomy. To achieve good results of the surgery, accurate preoperative planning based on biomechanics of the high anteversion cases, method for accurate application of the plan, and stable fixation are very important. At ISTA 2008, we have reported that the location of the anteversion exist several centimeters below the lesser trochanter. Independently from the extent of anteversion, femoral head, grater trochanter, and lesser trochanter are aligned in the same proportion. We have also reported in 2007, in improper high anteversion cases, many cases grow osteophytes posterior side of femoral head to reduce it functionally. In 2014, we reported about development of the stem for subtrochanteric osteotomy. (ModulusR)[Fig.1] In the present study, we established systematic planning way for estimate proper derotation and shortening and apply it for the surgery. Methods. Leg alignment during walking were well observed. According to the CT, 3D geometry of the femur, anteversion in hip joint and its compensation by the osteophyte, and knee rotation were measured. It was divided into proximal part and distal part at several centimeter below the lesser trochanter. Adequate hip local anteversion was determined by local original anteversion – compensation if IR-ER can be done. Keeping that anteversion for the proximal part, distal part was rotated as knee towards front. Thus derotation angle was decided. Using 3D CAD (Magics®) proper size of Modulus R was selected and overlapping with canal was extracted then its center of gravity was calculated. This level is decided as the height of osteotomy to obtain equal fixation to both proximal and distal part.[Fig.2] If the derotation angle is less than 15 degree, modular neck adjustment was selected first. By trial reduction and motion test, according to the instability osteotomy was performed. In the high hip center cases, original hip center was reconstructed. Shortening length was determined not to make leg elongation more than 3cm. ModulusR were used for the replacement and fixation of the osteotomy. Results. Eight cases were operated with this procedures. Standard Modulus was used in one case. In the case rotational fixation was well obtained but proximal stress shielding happened. ModulusR was used in other seven cases. In one ModulusR case vertical clack; which was fixed by metal band; happened in proximal part by the repeated rotational adjustment. But in all ModulusR cases, weight baring could be started in 1 week and good union was observed. Every patient feels knee direction became better than before.[Fig.3,4]. Discussion. In intraoperative stability test, much better stability was obtained after derotational osteotomy was done than the adjustment only by modular neck direction. Reducing anteversion by osteotomy was supposed to have advantage. Limitation of this paper is that the adequate hip local anteversion was estimated from femoral geometry and osteophytes and knee direction during walking. Future improvement would to use 2D-3D matching while walking to determine accurate hip local anteversion

Introduction. Literature describes pelvic rotation on lateral X rays from standing to sitting position. EOS full body lateral images provide additional information about the global posture. The projection of the vertical line from C7 (C7 VL) is used to evaluate the spine balance. C7 VL can also measure pelvic sagittal translation (PST) by its horizontal distance to the hip center (HC). This study evaluates the impact of a THA implantation on pelvic rotation and sagittal translation. Materials and Method. Lumbo-pelvic parameters of 120 patients have been retrospectively assessed pre and post- operatively on both standing and sitting acquisitions (primary unilateral THA without complication). PST is zero when C7VL goes through the center of the femoral heads and positive when C7VL is posterior to the hips' center (negative if anterior). Three subgroups were defined according to pelvic incidence (PI): low PI <45°, 45°<normal PI<65° or high PI>65°. Results. Pre-operatively PST standing was −0.9 cm (SD 4.5; [−15.1 to 7.2]) and PST sitting was 1.3cm (SD 3.3; [−7.7 to 11.8]). The overall mean change from standing to sitting was 2.2 cm ([−7.2 to 17.4]) (p<0.05). Post-operatively PST standing was 0.2 cm (SD 4.7; [−17 to 8.1]) and PST sitting was 1.4cm (SD 3.5; [−7.3 to 10.4]). The overall mean change from standing to sitting was 1.2 cm ([−14.2 to 22.4]) (p<0.05). In low PI group pre and post-operatively, PST increased significantly from standing to sitting (p<0.05; with HC going anterior to C7VL). When comparing pre and post operative changes, standing PST significantly increased (p=0.001). Pre to postoperative PST variation (sitting-standing) decreased significantly (p=0,01). In normal PI group pre-operatively, PST increased from standing to sitting (p=0.004). When comparing pre and postoperative changes, PST increased (p=0.006). Pre to postoperative PST variation (sitting-standing) decreased significantly (p=0,04). In high PI group pre and post operatively, PST increased from standing to sitting (p=0.034) while there are no significant changes from pre to post-operative status in standing and in sitting. Discussion. Anteroposterior pelvic tilt is not the only adaptation strategy for postural changes from standing to sitting positions. Anteroposterior pelvic translation (quantified by PST) is an important adaptation mechanism for postural changes. Comparison of pre and post-operative values of PST points out the importance of pelvic translation for low and standard PI patients after THA. The anteroposterior translation appears to change significantly in different functional positions pre and post operatively. This is an important variable to consider when assessing the patients' posture change or investigating the causes of the hip dislocation after total hip arthroplasty or spinal fusion. Conclusion. Pelvic translation must be considered as a significant mechanism of adaptation after THA. Further studies are needed to study the impact on subluxation or dislocation

THA after acetabular fracture presents unique technical challenges. These challenges include bone deformity, bone deficiency, sclerotic or dysvascular bone, non-united bony fragments, pelvic discontinuity, retained hardware, heterotopic ossification, previous incisions, and concerns regarding the sciatic nerve. Despite these challenges, with current treatment methods, a high degree of success can be achieved with modern technology. Preoperative evaluation for infection - In previously operated acetabular fractures, infection is always a concern. Screening C-reactive protein and sedimentation rate may be performed. If a concern regarding infection is present, the hip may be aspirated; Incisions - In most cases, a previous incision may be utilised. If necessary, an incision may be extended or a new limb can be created and attention should be paid to maintaining optimal skin bridges. In cases with a high degree of concern about infection, a staged procedure may be considered. However, in most cases, hardware removal can be done selectively at the time of THA surgery. Hardware that does not compromise placement of the THA may be left in place. Sometimes hardware can be cut off within the acetabulum to minimise exposure needs. The reconstructive goal is to place the hip center as close as possible to normal hip center but also to gain good support of the socket on host bone. In most cases, both goals can be met. When necessary, some compromise in hip center of rotation may be considered to optimise implant stability on host bone. The principles of revision surgery are followed using uncemented acetabular components fixed with augmentation screws. Most bone deficiencies may be managed with methods similar to revision hip surgery. However, in the acetabular fracture patient, usually the host femoral head is available and this can be used as bone graft, either in particulate or bulk form. Most cavitary deficiencies can be dealt with particulate bone graft. Some superolateral bone deficiencies from posterior wall fractures may be considered for bone grafting or augmentation techniques. Nonunited fractures are not uncommon in these circumstances. Small wall nonunions may be managed as noted above for bone deficiency. If pelvic discontinuity is present, it is usually best treated by following the rules established for treatment of pelvic discontinuity with pelvic plating. Pelvic plating provides a reasonable likelihood of bone healing in these circumstances when combined with bone grafting techniques. Heterotopic ossification is common in previously operated acetabular fractures. Removal of heterotopic bone at the time of surgery to gain hip motion is routine. Postoperative measures to reduce the likelihood of bone formation (that is either shielded radiation or use of a nonsteroid anti-inflammatory agent) may be strongly considered. The sciatic nerve is at risk during these procedures. In many cases, avoiding the nerve and the region of the nerve is a reasonable approach. When a lot of work must be done on the posterior column, the surgeon needs to know exactly where the nerve is and in such cases the nerve may be exposed distally beneath the gluteus maximus tendon and followed proximally with careful and judicious dissection. Results of total hip arthroplasty after acetabular fracture have varied in the past. More recent series have shown a high rate of acetabular fixation associated with uncemented hemispherical implants. Acetabular fracture patients are disproportionately young and active with unilateral hip disease and, therefore, bearing surfaces should be chosen accordingly