Aims. Cross-table lateral (CTL) radiographs are commonly used to measure acetabular component anteversion after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The CTL measurements may differ by > 10° from CT scan measurements but the reasons for this discrepancy are poorly understood. Anteversion measurements from CTL radiographs and CT scans are compared to identify spinopelvic parameters predictive of inaccuracy. Methods. THA patients (n = 47; 27 males, 20 females; mean age 62.9 years (SD 6.95)) with preoperative spinopelvic mobility, radiological analysis, and postoperative CT scans were retrospectively reviewed. Acetabular component anteversion was measured on postoperative CTL radiographs and CT scans using 3D reconstructions of the pelvis. Two cohorts were identified based on a CTL-CT error of ≥ 10° (n = 11) or < 10° (n = 36). Spinopelvic mobility parameters were compared using independent-samples t-tests. Correlation between error and mobility parameters were assessed with Pearson’s coefficient. Results. Patients with CTL error > 10° (10° to 14°) had stiffer lumbar spines with less mean lumbar flexion (38.9°(SD 11.6°) vs 47.4° (SD 13.1°); p = 0.030), different sagittal balance measured by pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (5.9° (SD 18.8°) vs -1.7° (SD 9.8°); p = 0.042), more pelvic extension when seated (pelvic tilt -9.7° (SD 14.1°) vs -2.2° (SD 13.2°); p = 0.050), and greater change in pelvic tilt between supine and seated positions (12.6° (SD 12.1°) vs 4.7° (SD 12.5°); p = 0.036). The CTL measurement error showed a positive correlation with increased CTL anteversion (r = 0.5; p = 0.001), standing lordosis (r = 0.23; p = 0.050), seated lordosis (r = 0.4; p = 0.009), and pelvic tilt change between supine and step-up positions (r = 0.34; p = 0.010). Conclusion. Differences in spinopelvic mobility may explain the variability of acetabular anteversion measurements made on CTL radiographs. Patients with stiff spines and increased compensatory pelvic movement have less accurate measurements on CTL radiographs. Flexion of the contralateral hip is required to obtain clear CTL radiographs. In patients with lumbar stiffness, this movement may extend the pelvis and increase anteversion of the acetabulum on CTL views. Reliable analysis of acetabular component anteversion in this patient population may require advanced imaging with a CT scan. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):59–65

Introduction. Patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility are at increased risk for hip instability. Measuring the change in sacral slope (ΔSS) with standing and seated lateral radiographs is commonly used to determine spinopelvic mobility pre-operatively. Sacral slope should decrease at least 10 degrees to demonstrate adequate accommodation. Accommodation of <10 deg necessitates acetabular component position change or use of a dual mobility implant. There is potential for different ΔSS measurements in the same patient based on sitting posture. Methods. 78 patients who underwent THA were reviewed to quantify the variability in pre-operative spinopelvic mobility when two different seated positions (relaxed sitting v. pre-rise sitting) were used in the same patient. Results. 34 patients had standardized pre-rise sitting x-rays, while 44 patients had standardized relaxed sitting x-rays. Of the 44 patients with relaxed sitting x-rays, the mean ΔSS (ΔrSS) was 20.4 degrees. No patients exhibited an increase in sacral slope when sitting (ie; reverse accommodation). Of the 34 patients with pre-rise sitting x-rays, the mean pre-rise sit-stand change (ΔprSS) was only 1.85 degrees with 47% (16/34) showing reverse accommodation, actually increasing the seated sacral slope compared to standing sacral slope. 18 patients had both pre-rise and relaxed sitting x-rays. In patients with both seated x-rays, the mean relaxed sit-stand change in sacral slope (ΔrSS) was 18.1 ± 6.1 degrees and only 3.0 ± 10.5 degrees for pre-rise sit-stand (ΔprSS), with a mean ΔSS difference of the 15.1 degrees (p <0.0001). Conclusion. A 15 degrees error could be made in pre-operative planning depending on the seated posture of the patient. Since decisions on component position or use of dual-mobility are made on pre-operative lateral sit-stand radiographs, postural standardization is critical. The relaxed seated radiograph is the preferred posture at the time of the seated lateral radiograph. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

The radiological evaluation of the anterolateral femoral head is an essential tool for the assessment of the cam type of femoroacetabular impingement. CT, MRI and frog lateral plain radiographs have all been suggested as imaging options for this type of lesion. The alpha angle is accepted as a reliable indicator of the cam type of impingement and may also be used as an assessment for the successful operative correction of the cam lesion. We studied the alpha angles of 32 consecutive patients with femoroacetabular impingement. The angle measured on frog lateral radiographs using templating tools was compared with that measured on CT scans in order to assess the reliability of the frog lateral view in analysing the alpha angle in cam impingement. A high interobserver reliability was noted for the assessment of the alpha angle on the frog lateral view with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.83. The mean alpha angle measured on the frog lateral view was 58.71° (32° to 83.3°) and that by CT was 65.11° (30° to 102°). A poor intraclass correlation coefficient (0.08) was noted between the measurements using the two systems. The frog lateral plain radiograph is not reliable for measuring the alpha angle. Various factors may be responsible for this such as the projection of the radiograph, the positioning of the patient and the quality of the image. CT may be necessary for accurate measurement of the alpha angle

Aims. Patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility are at increased risk for instability. Measuring the change in sacral slope (ΔSS) can help determine spinopelvic mobility preoperatively. Sacral slope (SS) should decrease at least 10° to demonstrate adequate posterior pelvic tilt. There is potential for different ΔSS measurements in the same patient based on sitting posture. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of sitting posture on the ΔSS in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. In total, 51 patients undergoing THA were reviewed to quantify the variability in preoperative spinopelvic mobility when measuring two different sitting positions using SS for planning. Results. A total of 32 patients had standardized relaxed sitting radiographs, while 35 patients had standardized flexed sitting images. Of the 32 patients with relaxed sitting views, the mean ΔSS was 20.7° (SD 8.9°). No patients exhibited an increase in SS during relaxed sitting (i.e. anterior pelvic tilt or so-called reverse accommodation). Of the 35 patients with flexed sitting radiographs, the mean ΔSS was only 2.1° (SD 9.7°) with 16/35 (45.71%) showing anterior pelvic tilt, or so-called reverse accommodation, unexpectedly increasing the sitting SS compared to the standing SS. Overall, 18 patients had both relaxed sitting and flexed sitting radiographs. In patients with both types of sitting radiographs, the mean relaxed sit to stand ΔSS was 18.06° (SD 6.07°), while only a 3.00° (SD 10.53°) ΔSS was noted when flexed sitting. There was a mean ΔSS difference of 15.06° (SD 7.67°) noted in the same patient cohort depending on sitting posture (p < 0.001). Conclusion. A 15° mean difference was noted depending on the sitting posture of the patient. Since decisions on component position can be made on preoperative lateral sit-stand radiographs, postural standardization is crucial. If using ΔSS for preoperative planning, the relaxed sitting radiograph is preferred. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):41–46

Aims. Pelvic tilt (PT) can significantly change the functional orientation of the acetabular component and may differ markedly between patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Patients with stiff spines who have little change in PT are considered at high risk for instability following THA. Femoral component position also contributes to the limits of impingement-free range of motion (ROM), but has been less studied. Little is known about the impact of combined anteversion on risk of impingement with changing pelvic position. Methods. We used a virtual hip ROM (vROM) tool to investigate whether there is an ideal functional combined anteversion for reduced risk of hip impingement. We collected PT information from functional lateral radiographs (standing and sitting) and a supine CT scan, which was then input into the vROM tool. We developed a novel vROM scoring system, considering both seated flexion and standing extension manoeuvres, to quantify whether hips had limited ROM and then correlated the vROM score to component position. Results. The vast majority of THA planned with standing combined anteversion between 30° to 50° and sitting combined anteversion between 45° to 65° had a vROM score > 99%, while the majority of vROM scores less than 99% were outside of this zone. The range of PT in supine, standing, and sitting positions varied widely between patients. Patients who had little change in PT from standing to sitting positions had decreased hip vROM. Conclusion. It has been shown previously that an individual’s unique spinopelvic alignment influences functional cup anteversion. But functional combined anteversion, which also considers stem position, should be used to identify an ideal THA position for impingement-free ROM. We found a functional combined anteversion zone for THA that may be used moving forward to place total hip components. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):834–841

Aims

In this study, we aimed to visualize the spatial distribution characteristics of femoral head necrosis using a novel measurement method.

Aims. The aim of the study was to compare two methods of calculating pelvic incidence (PI) and pelvic tilt (PT), either by using the femoral heads or acetabular domes to determine the bicoxofemoral axis, in patients with unilateral or bilateral primary hip osteoarthritis (OA). Methods. PI and PT were measured on standing lateral radiographs of the spine in two groups: 50 patients with unilateral (Group I) and 50 patients with bilateral hip OA (Group II), using the femoral heads or acetabular domes to define the bicoxofemoral axis. Agreement between the methods was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the standard error of measurement (SEm). The intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of the two methods were analyzed on 31 radiographs in both groups to calculate ICC and SEm. Results. In both groups, excellent agreement between the two methods was obtained, with ICC of 0.99 and SEm 0.3° for Group I, and ICC 0.99 and SEm 0.4° for Group II. The intraobserver reproducibility was excellent for both methods in both groups, with an ICC of at least 0.97 and SEm not exceeding 0.8°. The study also revealed excellent interobserver reliability for both methods in both groups, with ICC 0.99 and SEm 0.5° or less. Conclusion. Either the femoral heads or acetabular domes can be used to define the bicoxofemoral axis on the lateral standing radiographs of the spine for measuring PI and PT in patients with idiopathic unilateral or bilateral hip OA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(8):1345–1350

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a patient-specific algorithm which we developed for predicting changes in sagittal pelvic tilt after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. This retrospective study included 143 patients who underwent 171 THAs between April 2019 and October 2020 and had full-body lateral radiographs preoperatively and at one year postoperatively. We measured the pelvic incidence (PI), the sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt, sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), and thoracic kyphosis to classify patients into types A, B1, B2, B3, and C. The change of pelvic tilt was predicted according to the normal range of SVA (0 mm to 50 mm) for types A, B1, B2, and B3, and based on the absolute value of one-third of the PI-LL mismatch for type C patients. The reliability of the classification of the patients and the prediction of the change of pelvic tilt were assessed using kappa values and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), respectively. Validity was assessed using the overall mean error and mean absolute error (MAE) for the prediction of the change of pelvic tilt. Results. The kappa values were 0.927 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.861 to 0.992) and 0.945 (95% CI 0.903 to 0.988) for the inter- and intraobserver reliabilities, respectively, and the ICCs ranged from 0.919 to 0.997. The overall mean error and MAE for the prediction of the change of pelvic tilt were -0.3° (SD 3.6°) and 2.8° (SD 2.4°), respectively. The overall absolute change of pelvic tilt was 5.0° (SD 4.1°). Pre- and postoperative values and changes in pelvic tilt, SVA, SS, and LL varied significantly among the five types of patient. Conclusion. We found that the proposed algorithm was reliable and valid for predicting the standing pelvic tilt after THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(1):19–27

Aims. Assessment of bone mineral density (BMD) with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is a well-established clinical technique, but it is not available in the acute trauma setting. Thus, it cannot provide a preoperative estimation of BMD to help guide the technique of fracture fixation. Alternative methods that have been suggested for assessing BMD include: 1) cortical measures, such as cortical ratios and combined cortical scores; and 2) aluminium grading systems from preoperative digital radiographs. However, limited research has been performed in this area to validate the different methods. The aim of this study was to investigate the evaluation of BMD from digital radiographs by comparing various methods against DXA scanning. Methods. A total of 54 patients with distal radial fractures were included in the study. Each underwent posteroanterior (PA) and lateral radiographs of the injured wrist with an aluminium step wedge. Overall 27 patients underwent routine DXA scanning of the hip and lumbar spine, with 13 undergoing additional DXA scanning of the uninjured forearm. Analysis of radiographs was performed on ImageJ and Matlab with calculations of cortical measures, cortical indices, combined cortical scores, and aluminium equivalent grading. Results. Cortical measures showed varying correlations with the forearm DXA results (range: Pearson correlation coefficient (r) = 0.343 (p = 0.251) to r = 0.521 (p = 0.068)), with none showing statistically significant correlations. Aluminium equivalent grading showed statistically significant correlations with the forearm DXA of the corresponding region of interest (p < 0.017). Conclusion. Cortical measures, cortical indices, and combined cortical scores did not show a statistically significant correlation to forearm DXA measures. Aluminium-equivalent is an easily applicable method for estimation of BMD from digital radiographs in the preoperative setting. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):830–839

Acetabular component positioning is commonly referenced with the pelvis in the supine position in direct anterior approach THA. Changes in pelvic tilt (PT) from the pre-operative supine to the post-operative standing positions have not been well investigated and may have relevance to optimal acetabular component targeting for reduced risk of impingement and instability. The aims of this study were therefore to determine the change in PT that occurs from pre-operative supine to post-operative standing, and whether any factors are associated with significant changes in tilt ≥13° in posterior direction. 13° in a posterior direction was chosen as that amount of posterior rotation creates an increase in functional anteversion of the acetabular component of 10°. 1097 THA patients with pre-operative supine CT and standing lateral radiographic imaging and 1 year post-operative standing lateral radiographs (interquartile range 12–13 months) were reviewed. Pre-operative supine PT was measured from CT as the angle between the anterior pelvic plane (APP) and the horizontal plane of the CT device. Standing PT was measured on standing lateral x-rays as the angle between the APP and the vertical line. Patients with ≥13° change from supine pre-op to standing post-op (corresponding to a 10° change in cup anteversion) were grouped and compared to those with a <13° change using unpaired student's t-tests. Mean pre-operative supine PT (3.8±6.0°) was significantly different from mean post-operative standing PT (−3.5±7.1°, p<0.001), ie mean change of −7.3±4.6°. 10.4% (114/1097) of patients had posterior PT changes ≥13° supine pre-op to standing post-op. A significant number of patients, ie 1 in 10, undergo a clinically significant change in PT and functional anteversion from supine pre-op to standing post-op. Surgeons should be aware of these changes when planning component placement in THA

We present minimum 20 year results of a randomized, prospective double blinded trial (RCT) of cross-linked versus conventional polyethylene (PE), using a computer assisted method of PE wear measurement. After Ethics Committee approval, 122 patients were enrolled into an RCT comparing Enduron (non cross-linked PE) and highly cross-linked Marathon PE (DePuy, Leeds, UK). Other than the PE liners, identical components were used, a Duraloc 300 metal shell with one screw, a 28mm CoCr femoral head and a cemented Charnley Elite femoral stem. All patients were followed with anteroposterior (A∼P) and lateral radiographs at 3 days, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 and 20 years. PE wear was measured with PolyMig, which has a phantom validated accuracy of ± 0.09mm. At minimum 20 year follow-up, 47 patients had died, 5 of which had been revised prior to their death. Another 32 patients were revised and alive, leaving 43 patients unrevised and alive (15 Enduron, 28 Marathon). No patients were lost to follow-up, but 2 were not able to be radiographed (dementia), leaving 41 patients (15 Enduron, 26 Marathon) available for PE wear measurement. After the bedding-in period, Enduron liners had a wear rate of 0.182 mm/year, and Marathon liners had a wear rate of 0.028 mm/year. At 20 years follow-up, 37 patients had required revision. Patients with conventional PE had three times the revision rate (28/37) of those who received XLPE (9/37). This is the longest term RCT showing substantially improved clinical and radiological results when XLPE is used as the bearing surface

Aims. The localization of necrotic areas has been reported to impact the prognosis and treatment strategy for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). Anteroposterior localization of the necrotic area after a femoral neck fracture (FNF) has not been properly investigated. We hypothesize that the change of the weight loading direction on the femoral head due to residual posterior tilt caused by malunited FNF may affect the location of ONFH. We investigate the relationship between the posterior tilt angle (PTA) and anteroposterior localization of osteonecrosis using lateral hip radiographs. Methods. Patients aged younger than 55 years diagnosed with ONFH after FNF were retrospectively reviewed. Overall, 65 hips (38 males and 27 females; mean age 32.6 years (SD 12.2)) met the inclusion criteria. Patients with stage 1 or 4 ONFH, as per the Association Research Circulation Osseous classification, were excluded. The ratios of anterior and posterior viable areas and necrotic areas of the femoral head to the articular surface were calculated by setting the femoral head centre as the reference point. The PTA was measured using Palm’s method. The association between the PTA and viable or necrotic areas of the femoral head was assessed using Spearman’s rank correlation analysis (median PTA 6.0° (interquartile range 3 to 11.5)). Results. We identified a negative correlation between PTA and anterior viable areas (rho −0.477; p = 0.001), and no correlation between PTA and necrotic (rho 0.229; p = 0.067) or posterior viable areas (rho 0.204; p = 0.132). Conclusion. Our results suggest that residual posterior tilt after FNF could affect the anteroposterior localization of necrosis. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(5):394–400

Aims. Pelvic incidence (PI) is a position-independent spinopelvic parameter traditionally used by spinal surgeons to determine spinal alignment. Its relevance to the arthroplasty surgeon in assessing patient risk for total hip arthroplasty (THA) instability preoperatively is unclear. This study was undertaken to investigate the significance of PI relative to other spinopelvic parameter risk factors for instability to help guide its clinical application. Methods. Retrospective analysis was performed of a multicentre THA database of 9,414 patients with preoperative imaging (dynamic spinopelvic radiographs and pelvic CT scans). Several spinopelvic parameter measurements were made by engineers using advanced software including sacral slope (SS), standing anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPT), spinopelvic tilt (SPT), lumbar lordosis (LL), and PI. Lumbar flexion (LF) was determined by change in LL between standing and flexed-seated lateral radiographs. Abnormal pelvic mobility was defined as ∆SPT ≥ 20° between standing and flexed-forward positions. Sagittal spinal deformity (SSD) was defined as PI-LL mismatch > 10°. Results. PI showed a positive correlation with parameters of SS, SPT, and LL (r-value range 0.468 to 0.661). Patients with a higher PI value showed higher degrees of standing LL, likely as a compensatory measure to maintain sagittal spine balance. There was a positive correlation between LL and LF such that patients with less standing LL had decreased LF (r = 0.49). Similarly, there was a positive correlation between increased SSD and decreased LF (r = 0.54). PI in isolation did not show any significant correlation with lumbar (r = 0.04) or pelvic mobility (r = 0.02). The majority of patients (range 89.4% to 94.2%) had normal lumbar and pelvic mobility regardless of the PI value. Conclusion. The PI value alone is not indicative of either spinal or pelvic mobility, and thus in isolation may not be a risk factor for THA instability. Patients with SSD had higher rates of spinopelvic stiffness, which may be the mechanism by which PI relates to THA instability risk, but further clinical studies are required. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(3):352–358

Introduction. Patients with reduced lumbar spine mobility are at higher risk of dislocation after THA as their hips have to compensate for spinal stiffness. Therefore our study aimed to 1) Define the optimal protocol for identifying patients with mobile hips and stiff lumbar spines and 2) Determine clinical and standing radiographic parameters predicting high hip and reduced lumbar spine mobility. Methods. This prospective diagnostic cohort study followed 113 consecutive patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis (OA) awaiting THA. Radiographic measurements were performed for the lumbar lordosis angle, pelvic tilt and pelvic-femoral angle on lateral radiographs in the standing, ‘relaxed-seated’ and ‘deep-seated’ (i.e. torso maximally leaning forward) position. A “hip user index” was calculated in order to quantify the contribution of the hip joint to the overall sagittal movement performed by the femur, pelvis and lumbar spine. Results. Radiographs in the relaxed-seated position had an accuracy of 56% (95%CI:46–65%) to detect patients with stiff lumbar spines, compared to a detected rate of 100% in the deep-seated position. The mean ‘hip user index’ was 63±12% and ten patients (9%) were hip users, having an index of 80% or more. A standing pelvic tilt of ≥18.5° was the only predictor for being a hip user with a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 71% (AUC 0.83). Patients with a standing pelvic tilt ≥18.5° and an unbalanced spine with a flatback deformity had a 30xfold relative risk (95%-CI:4–226; p<0.001) of being a hip user. Conclusion. Patients awaiting THA and having high hip and reduced lumbar spine mobility can be screened for with lateral standing radiographs of the spinopelvic complex and a thorough clinical examination. If the initial screening is positive, radiographs in the deep-seated position allow for better identification of patients being ‘hip users’ compared to radiographs in the relaxed-seated position

Aims. While previously underappreciated, factors related to the spine contribute substantially to the risk of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). These factors must be taken into consideration during preoperative planning for revision THA due to recurrent instability. We developed a protocol to assess the functional position of the spine, the significance of these findings, and how to address different pathologies at the time of revision THA. Patients and Methods. Prospectively collected data on 111 patients undergoing revision THA for recurrent instability from January 2014 to January 2017 at two institutions were included (protocol group) and matched 1:1 to 111 revisions specifically performed for instability not using this protocol (control group). Mean follow-up was 2.8 years. Protocol patients underwent standardized preoperative imaging including supine and standing anteroposterior (AP) pelvis and lateral radiographs. Each case was scored according to the Hip-Spine Classification in Revision THA. Results. Survival free of dislocation at two years was 97% in the protocol group (three dislocations, all within three months of surgery) versus 84% in the control group (18 patients). Furthermore, 77% of the inappropriately positioned acetabular components would have been unrecognized by supine AP pelvis imaging alone. Conclusion. Using the Hip-Spine Classification System in revision THA, we demonstrated a significant decrease in the risk of recurrent instability compared with a control group. Without the use of this algorithm, 77% of inappropriately positioned acetabular components would have been unrecognized and incorrect treatment may have been instituted. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:817–823

Aims. This study of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip aimed to: 1) characterize the contribution of the hip, spinopelvic complex, and lumbar spine when moving from the standing to the sitting position; 2) assess whether abnormal spinopelvic mobility is associated with worse symptoms; and 3) identify whether spinopelvic mobility can be predicted from static anatomical radiological parameters. Patients and Methods. A total of 122 patients with end-stage OA of the hip awaiting total hip arthroplasty (THA) were prospectively studied. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; Oxford Hip Score, Oswestry Disability Index, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Score) and clinical data were collected. Sagittal spinopelvic mobility was calculated as the change from the standing to sitting position using the lumbar lordosis angle (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic-femoral angle (PFA), and acetabular anteinclination (AI) from lateral radiographs. The interaction of the different parameters was assessed. PROMs were compared between patients with normal spinopelvic mobility (10° ≤ ∆PT ≤ 30°) or abnormal spinopelvic mobility (stiff: ∆PT < ± 10°; hypermobile: ∆PT > ± 30°). Multiple regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were used to test for possible predictors of spinopelvic mobility. Results. Standing to sitting, the hip flexed by a mean of 57° (. sd. 17°), the pelvis tilted backwards by a mean of 20° (. sd. 12°), and the lumbar spine flexed by a mean of 20° (. sd. 14°); strong correlations were detected. There was no difference in PROMs between patients in the different spinopelvic mobility groups. Maximum hip flexion, standing PT, and standing AI were independent predictors of spinopelvic mobility (R. 2. = 0.42). The combined thresholds for standing was PT ≥ 13° and hip flexion ≥ 88° in the clinical examination, and had 90% sensitivity and 63% specificity of predicting spinopelvic stiffness, while SS ≥ 42° had 84% sensitivity and 67% specificity of predicting spinopelvic hypermobility. Conclusion. The hip, on average, accounts for three-quarters of the standing-to-sitting movement, but there is great variation. Abnormal spinopelvic mobility cannot be screened with PROMs. However, clinical and standing radiological features can predict spinopelvic mobility with good enough accuracy, allowing them to be used as reliable screening tools. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:902–909

Introduction. The prevalence of the various patterns of spinopelvic abnormalities that increase the risk for prosthetic impingement is unknown. While prior surgery or lumbar fusion are recognized as a risk factors for postoperative dislocation, many patients presenting for THA do not have obvious radiographic abnormalities. The purpose of this study is to determine the prevalence of large posterior pelvic tilt (PPT) when standing, stiff lumbar-spine (SLL) and spino-pelvic sagittal imbalance (SSI) in patients undergoing primary THA. Methods. A consecutive series of 1592 patients (56% female) over 2 years underwent functional analysis of spinopelvic mobility using CT, standing, and flexed seated lateral radiographs as part of pre-operative THA planning. The average age was 65 (20–93). We investigated the prevalence of these 3 validated spinopelvic parameters known to increase the risk for impingent and correlated them to the patient's age and gender using Chi squared analysis. Finally, the risk of flexion and extension impingement was modeled for each patient at a default supine cup orientation (DSCO) of 40°/20° (±5°). Results. Overall, 221 hips (14%) had at least 1 risk factor for impingement, while 64 (4%) had 2, and 18 (1 %) had all 3 risk factors. The most common risk factor was large PPT (10%) followed by SLL (4%) and SSI (4%). Female gender was not associated with increased spinopelvic abnormalities (p = 0.64), but age > 75 years increased the likelihood of at least having 1 risk factor (p<0.01) (Table-1). Placing the cup within the DSCO resulted in observed prosthetic impingement in 792 patients (50%) (Fig-1). 158 hips (20%) had at least 1 risk factor, while 56 (7%) had 2, and 16 (2 %) had all 3 risk factors for impingement. Posterior pelvic tilt was associated with extension impingement risk, while SLL and SSI increased flexion impingement risk. Conclusion. Spinopelvic risk factors that increase impingement risk are not infrequent in THA patients. We observed 50% prosthetic impingement when a single target for acetabular orientation target was applied. For any figures, tables, or references, please contact the authors directly

Aims. Our study aimed to 1) Describe the changes in spinopelvic mobility when transitioning from standing, to ‘relaxed-seated’ and thereafter to ‘deep-seated’ position and 2) Determine the change in spinopelvic mobility types 1 year post-THA compared to preoperatively. Methods. This prospective diagnostic cohort study followed 100 consecutive patients 1 year post-THA. Preoperatively and one year postoperatively, radiographic measurements were performed for the lumbar-lordosis-angle, pelvic tilt and pelvic-femoral-angle on lateral radiographs in the standing, ‘relaxed-seated’ and ‘deep-seated’ position (torso maximally leaning forward). Patients were classified according to their spinopelvic mobility type, according to the change in PT between the standing and relaxed-seated position (stiff:ΔPT<±10°, normal:10°≤ΔPT≤30°, hypermobile:ΔPT>±30°). Results. Compared to preoperatively, when moving from a standing to a relaxed-seated position, hip flexion increased by 10°±18, leading to less posterior pelvic tilt by 6°±11 and reduced lumbar spine flexion by 6°±11 (all p<0.001). Similarly, when moving from the standing to deep-seated position, hip flexion improved by a mean of 8°±22, leading to reduced lumbar spine flexion by a mean of 5°±8, whereas the change in pelvic tilt did not change compared to preoperatively (p=0.016, p<0.001, p=0.46). The distribution of spinopelvic mobility types 1 year postoperatively was significantly different compared to preoperatively, as the percentage of patients with stiff spinopelvic mobility increased from 16% to 43% (p<0.001). Conclusion. Hip flexion improved by 10° on average 1 year after total hip arthroplasty. Thus, slightly less compensatory posterior pelvic tilt and lumbar spine flexion was needed when taking a relaxed-seated position. When taking a deep-seated position, improved hip flexion required less lumbar spine flexion. However, these changes were small when being compared to preoperative variability of these parameters. Thus, individual spinopelvic mobility remains relatively unchanged 1 year after THA compared to preoperatively

Introduction. The effect of spine-pelvis position and motion on hip arthroplasty function has been increasingly appreciated in the past several years. Some authors have stressed the importance of using precision technologies for component placement while others have advocated the use of dual mobility articulations or large bearings and lateralized liners in patients with fused lumbar spines. The current study assesses the prevalence of stiff and fused spines in an elective total hip arthroplasty population. Methods. One hundred and forty-nine patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty were assessed preoperatively with CT (computed tomography) and functional radiographs for the purpose of CT based planning and intraoperative navigation of total hip arthroplasty (HipXpert System, Surgical Planning Associates, Inc., Boston, MA). The functional radiographs included standing and sitting lateral images (EOS Imaging, SA, Paris, France). Patients were assessed for supine, standing and sitting pelvic tilt (PT) and change in sacral slope (SS). Spine stiffness was defined by a change in sacral slope (SS) of less than or equal to 10 degrees on the standing to sitting lateral radiographs according to Luthringer et al JOA 2019. Results. Of these 149 patients, 2 (1.5%) had been previously treated by instrumented lumbar fusion. Thirty-nine additional patients (26.1%) had stiff spines as defined by a change in sacral slope of less than 10 degrees from standing to sitting. The mean supine PT measured by CT scan was 3.46 degrees of anterior PT which is similar to previously described in the literature. The mean supine PT in stiff spine patients measured 1.5 degrees of anterior tilt which was not statistically significant. The mean standing pelvic tilt measured 0.0 degrees in the all patients and −4.3 degrees in stiff spine patients. The mean sitting pelvic tilt was −18.9 degrees in the entire cohort and −11.3 degrees in the stiff spine patients. The difference in pelvic tilt between these two groups was statistically significant with p-values of 0.002 and 0.006, respectively. Discussion and Conclusion. Although the incidence of formal instrumented spine fusion was low in this cohort (1.5%), the incidence of spine stiffness was very high at 27.6%. Given that hip instability has been decreasing owing to a variety of techniques including larger bearings, intraoperative radiography, and intraoperative precision technologies, advocacy for the use of dual mobility implants simply for a history of spine fusion does not appear to be logical given that most stiff spines have not had a surgical fusion

Background. It is not always clear why some patients experience recurrent dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). In order to plan appropriate revision surgery for such patients, however, it is important to understand the specific biomechanical basis for the dislocation. We have developed a novel method to analyse the biomechanical profile of the THA, specifically to identify edge loading and prosthetic impingement, taking into account spinopelvic mobility. In this study we compare the results of this analysis in THA patients with and without recurrent dislocation. Methods. Post-operative CT scans and lateral standing and seated radiographs of 40 THA patients were performed, 20 of whom had experienced postoperative dislocation. The changes in pelvic and femoral positions on the lateral radiographs were measured between the standing and seated positions, and a 3D digital model was then generated to simulate the movement of the hip when rising from a chair for each patient. The path of the joint reaction force (JRF) across the acetabular bearing surface and the motion of the femoral neck relative to the acetabular margin were then calculated for this “sit-to-stand” movement, in order to identify where there was risk of edge loading or prosthetic impingement. Results. For every patient it was possible to model the path of the JRF and the femoral neck relative to the acetabular component. The analysis predicted either edge loading or prosthetic impingement in significantly more patients in the “dislocating” group compared to the “non-dislocating” group (figure 1). Conclusions. This method of biomechanical simulation may be able to identify edge loading and / or prosthetic impingement in THA patients who have experienced recurrent dislocation. This may be helpful in planning appropriate revision surgery. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly