Purpose. The aim of this study is to describe the influence of sitting and standing posture on sagittal pelvic inclination in preoperative total hip replacement patients to assist with correct acetabular component positioning. Methods. Lateral radiographs of the pelvis and lumbar spine in sitting and standing of preoperative hip arthroplasty patients with primary hip osteoarthritis were extracted. Pelvic tilt was measured using the vertical inclination of a line from the ASIS to pubic tubercle. Sacral inclination was measured as the angle between the anterior surface of the sacrum and a horizontal reference. Figure one is a representation of the pelvic tilt angle and sacrel inclination angle taken during standing. The Cobb angle of the lumbar spine was recorded represented for a sitting patient in figure 2. Hip flexion was recorded (figure 2). Results. 60 patients were identified. Mean age of the cohort was 63. Sacral inclination ranged from 1 to 55 degrees in standing with a mean of 25.7 degrees. In sitting, sacral inclination ranged from 0.3–84.5 degrees with a mean of 24.1 degrees. Pelvic tilt ranged from 30 degrees posteriorly to 21.5 degrees anteriorly in standing. Pelvic tilt in sitting and ranged from 48 posterior to 42 degrees anterior tiltLumbar lordosis ranged from 11.6 to 91.7 degrees in standing. Lumbar lordosis in sitting ranged from 29.5 degrees(kyphosis) to 42 degrees (lordosis). Total hip flexion was 107.4 degrees from standing to sitting. Conclusions. There is wide variability in pelvic orientation between individuals in both postures Orientating acetabular components for total hip arthroplasty should account for postural changes in native version

Introduction

Understanding hip-spine relationships and accurate evaluation of the pelvis position are key- points for the optimization of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Hip surgeons know the importance of pelvic parameters and the adaptation mechanisms of pelvic and sub-pelvic areas. Literature about posture after THA remains controversial and adaptations are difficult to predict. One explanation can be the segmental analysis focused on pelvic parameters and local planning.

In a significant number of patients a global analysis may be important as a cascade of compensatory mechanisms is implemented, the hip being only one of the links of this chain reaction.

3 parameters can be measured on full body images:

The objective of this preliminary study is to report the post-operative evolution of posture after THA.

Introduction. Hip osteoarthritis (OA) results in reduced hip range of motion and contracture, affecting sitting and standing posture. Spinal pathology such as fusion or deformity may alter the ability to compensate for reduced joint mobility in sitting and standing postures. The effects of postural spinal alignment change between sitting and standing is not well understood. Methods. A retrospective radiographic review was performed at a single academic institution of patients with sitting and standing full-body radiographs between 2012 and 2017. Patients were excluded if they had transitional lumbosacral anatomy, prior spinal fusion or hip prosthesis. Hip OA severity was graded by the Kellgren-Lawrence grades and divided into two groups: low-grade OA (LOA; grade 0–2) and severe OA (SOA; grade 3–4). Spinopelvic parameters (Pelvic Incidence (PI), Pelvic Tilt (PT), Lumbar Lordosis (LL), and PI-LL), Thoracic Kyphosis (TK; T4-T12), Global spinal alignment (SVA and T1-Pelvic Angle; TPA; T10-L2) as well as proximal femoral shaft angle (PFSA: as measured from the vertical), and hip flexion (difference between change in PT and change in PFSA) were also measured. Changes in sit-stand radiographic parameters were compared between the LOA and SOA groups with unpaired t-test. Results. 548 patients were identified with sit-stand radiographs, of which there were 311 patients with LOA & 237 with SOA. After propensity score matching for Age, BMI, and PI, 183 LOA & 183 SOA patients were analyzed. Standing alignment analysis demonstrated that SOA patients had greater SVA (31.1 ± 36.68 vs 21.7 ± 38.83, p=0.02), and lower TK (−36.21 ± 11.98 vs −41.09 ± 11.47, p<0.001). SOA patients had lower PT, greater PI-LL, lower LL, lower T10-L2, and lower TPA (p>0.05). PFSA (9.09 5.19 vs 7.41 4.48, p<0.001) was significantly different compared to LOA while SOA KA was not significantly different compared to LOA. Sitting alignment analysis demonstrated that SOA patients had higher PT (29.69 ± 15.65 vs 23.32 ± 12.12, p<0.001), higher PI-LL (21.64 ±17.86 vs 12.44 ±14.84 p<0.001), lower LL (31.67 ± 16.40 vs 41.58 ± 14.73, p<0.001), lower TK (−33.22 ± 15.76 vs −38.57 ± 13.01, p=0.01), greater TPA (27.91 ± 14.7 vs 22.55 ± 11.38 p=0.01). TK, SVA, and PFSA were not significantly different compared to LOA. SOA and LOA groups demonstrated differences in standing and sitting spinopelvic alignment for all global and regional parameters except PI. When examining the postural changes from standing to sitting, there was less hip ROM in SOA than LOA (71.45 ± 18.55 vs 81.64 ± 12.57, p<0.001). As a result, SOA patients had more change in PT (15.24 ± 16.32 vs 7.28 ± 10.19, p<0.001), PI-LL (20.62 ± 17.25 vs 13.74 ± 11.16, p<0.001), LL (−21.37 ± 15.55 vs −13.09 ± 12.34, p<0.001), and T10-L2 (−4.94 ± 7.45 vs −1.08 ± 5.19, p<0.001) to compensate. SOA had a greater improvement in TPA (15.06 vs 9.59, p<0.001), and less change in PFSA (86.65 vs 88.81, p<0.001) compared to LOA. Conclusions. Spinopelvic compensatory mechanisms are adapted for reduced joint mobility associated with hip OA in standing and sitting

Introduction. Hip-Spine syndrome has various clinical aspects. For example, schoolchild with severe congenital dislocation of the hip have unfavorable standing posture and disadvantageous motions in ADL. Hip-Spine syndrome is closely related closely as the adjacent lumbar vertebrae and the hip joint. Furthermore, not only the pelvis and the lumbar spine, but also the neck position might influence on the maximum hip flexion angle. In this study, we examined the maximum hip flexion angle and pelvic movement angle by observing the lumbar spine, the pelvis and the neck in three different positions. Subjects and Methods. The participants were five healthy volunteers (three males and two females) and ranged in age from 16 to 49 years. We measured the hip flexion angle (=∠X) and the pelvic tilt angle (=∠Y), using Zebris WinData and putting the six markers on skin. The positions of the marker are Femur lateral condyle (M1), Greater trochanter (M2), Lateral margin of 10th rib (M3), Anterior superior iliac spine (M4), Superior lateral margin of Iliac (M5), and Acromion (M6). We performed maximum hip flexion three times in three positions and measured ∠X (=∠M1,2,3) and ∠Y (=∠M4,5,6) and calculated the mean and SD of each position. The first position (P1) that we investigated is the regular position specified by the Japanese Orthopedics Association and Rehabilitation Medical Association. The second position (P2) is performed in the limited position of the posterior pelvic tilt and lumbar movement, by placing the tube under the subject's lower back. The third position (P3) is the altered limited position of P2 added by placing the 500ml PET bottle filled water under the back of the subject's neck. Analysis. A two way factorial analysis of variance was used for statistical analysis to examine the difference among three different positions (P1, P2 and P3) in ∠X and ∠Y. A significance level was set at P < 0.05. We also calculated Spearman rank correlation coefficients to determine the correlation between ∠X and ∠Y. Results. There was a statistically significant difference among three different positions (P1, P2 and P3) in both ∠X and ∠Y (p < 0.01). Slight strong correlations were found between ∠X and ∠Y in three different positions. (r =0.5178571). The smallest values of ∠X and ∠Y were obtained in P1. The values of ∠X and ∠Y in P3 were all smaller than those in P2. Conclusions. The limited movement of pelvic and lumbar spine, and neck different positions give the limit to a maximum hip joint flexion angle

There have been a large number of studies reporting the knee joint force during level walking, however, the data of during deep knee flexion are scarce, and especially the data about patellofemoral joint force are lacking. Deep knee flexion is a important motion in Japan and some regions of Asia and Arab, because there are the lifestyle of sitting down and lying on the floor directly. Such data is necessary for designing and evaluating the new type of knee prosthesis which can flex deeply. Therefore we estimated the patellofemoral and tibiofemoral forces in deep knee flexion by using the masculoskeltal model of the lower limb. The model for the calculation was constructed by open chain of three bar link mechanism, and each link stood for thigh, lower leg and foot. And six muscles, gluteus maximus, hamstrings, rectus, vastus, gastrocnemius and soleus were modeled as the lines connecting the both end of insertion, which apply tensile force at the insertion on the links. And the model also included the gravity forces, thigh-calf contact forces on the Inputting the data of floor reacting forces and joint angles, the model calculated the muscle forces by the moment equilibrium conditions around each joint, and some assumptions about the ratio of the biarticular muscles. And then, the joint forces were estimated from the muscle forces, using the force equilibrium conditions on patella and tibia. The position/orientation of each segments, femur, patella and tibia, were decided by referring the literature. The motion to be analyzed was standing up from kneeling posture. The joint angles during the motion are shown in Fig.1. This motion included the motion from kneeling to squatting, rising the knee from the floor by flexing hip joint, and the motion from squatting to standing. The test subject was a healthy male, age 23[years], height 1.7[m], weight 65[kgw]. Results were shown in Fig.2. The patellofemoral force was little at standing posture, the end of the motion, however, was as large as tibiofemoral force during the knee joint angle was over 130 degrees. The reason of this was that the patellofemoral joint force was heavily dependent on the quadriceps forces, and the quadriceps tensile force was large at deep knee flexion, at kneeling or squatting posture. The maximum tibiofemoral force was 3.5[BW] at the beginning of standing up from squatting posture. And the maximum patellofemoral force was 3.8[BW] at the motion from kneeling to squatting posture. The conclusion was that the patellofemoral joint force might not be ignored in deep knee flexion and the design of the knee prosthesis should be include the strength design of patellofemoral joint

Aims

Despite the increase in the surgical repair of proximal hamstring tears, there exists a lack of consensus in the optimal timing for surgery. There is also disagreement on how partial tears managed surgically compare with complete tears repaired surgically. This study aims to compare the mid-term functional outcomes in, and operating time required for, complete and partial proximal hamstring avulsions, that are repaired both acutely and chronically.