Aims. The risk factors for abnormal spinopelvic mobility (SPM), defined as an anterior rotation of the spinopelvic tilt (∆SPT) ≥ 20° in a flexed-seated position, have been described. The implication of pelvic incidence (PI) is unclear, and the concept of lumbar lordosis (LL) based on anatomical limits may be erroneous. The distribution of LL, including a unusual shape in patients with a high lordosis, a low pelvic incidence, and an anteverted pelvis seems more relevant. Methods. The clinical data of 311 consecutive patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty was retrospectively analyzed. We analyzed the different types of lumbar shapes that can present in patients to identify their potential associations with abnormal pelvic mobility, and we analyzed the potential risk factors associated with a ∆SPT ≥ 20° in the overall population. Results. ΔSPT ≥ 20° rates were 28.3%, 11.8%, and 14.3% for patients whose spine shape was low PI/low lordosis (group 1), low PI anteverted (group 2), and high PI/high lordosis (group 3), respectively (p = 0.034). There was no association between ΔSPT ≥ 20° and PI ≤ 41° (odds ratio (OR) 2.01 (95% confidence interval (CI)0.88 to 4.62), p = 0.136). In the multivariate analysis, the following independent predictors of ΔSPT ≥ 20° were identified: SPT ≤ -10° (OR 3.49 (95% CI 1.59 to 7.66), p = 0.002), IP-LL ≥ 20 (OR 4.38 (95% CI 1.16 to 16.48), p = 0.029), and group 1 (OR 2.47 (95% CI 1.19; to 5.09), p = 0.0148). Conclusion. If the PI value alone is not indicative of SPM, patients with a low PI, low lordosis and a lumbar apex at L4-L5 or below will have higher rates of abnormal SPM than patients with a low PI anteverted and high lordosis. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):668–675

Aims

The purpose of this study was to evaluate spinopelvic mechanics from standing and sitting positions in subjects with and without femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). We hypothesize that FAI patients will experience less flexion at the lumbar spine and more flexion at the hip whilst changing from standing to sitting positions than subjects without FAI. This increase in hip flexion may contribute to symptomatology in FAI.

Aims. Spinopelvic pathology increases the risk for instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA), yet few studies have evaluated how pathology varies with age or sex. The aims of this study were: 1) to report differences in spinopelvic parameters with advancing age and between the sexes; and 2) to determine variation in the prevalence of THA instability risk factors with advancing age. Methods. A multicentre database with preoperative imaging for 15,830 THA patients was reviewed. Spinopelvic parameter measurements were made by experienced engineers, including anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPT), spinopelvic tilt (SPT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), and pelvic incidence (PI). Lumbar flexion (LF), sagittal spinal deformity, and hip user index (HUI) were calculated using parameter measurements. Results. With advancing age, patients demonstrate increased posterior APPT, decreased standing LL, decreased LF, higher pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, higher prevalence of abnormal spinopelvic mobility, and higher HUI percentage. With each decade, APPT progressed posteriorly 2.1°, LF declined 6.0°, PI-LL mismatch increased 2.9°, and spinopelvic mobility increased 3.8°. Significant differences were found between the sexes for APPT, SPT, SS, LL, and LF, but were not felt to be clinically relevant. Conclusion. With advancing age, spinopelvic biomechanics demonstrate decreased spinal mobility and increased pelvic/hip mobility. Surgeons should consider the higher prevalence of instability risk factors in elderly patients and anticipate changes evolving in spinopelvic biomechanics for young patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(8):792–801

Aims. Spinopelvic mobility plays an important role in functional acetabular component position following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The primary aim of this study was to determine if spinopelvic hypermobility persists or resolves following THA. Our second aim was to identify patient demographic or radiological factors associated with hypermobility and resolution of hypermobility after THA. Methods. This study investigated patients with preoperative posterior hypermobility, defined as a change in sacral slope (SS) from standing to sitting (ΔSS. stand-sit. ) ≥ 30°. Radiological spinopelvic parameters, including SS, pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), PI-LL mismatch, anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPt), and spinopelvic tilt (SPT), were measured on preoperative imaging, and at six weeks and a minimum of one year postoperatively. The severity of bilateral hip osteoarthritis (OA) was graded using Kellgren-Lawrence criteria. Results. A total of 136 patients were identified as having preoperative spinopelvic hypermobility. At one year after THA, 95% (129/136) of patients were no longer categorized as hypermobile on standing and sitting radiographs (ΔSS. stand-sit. < 30°). Mean ΔSS. stand-sit. decreased from 36.4° (SD 5.1°) at baseline to 21.4° (SD 6.6°) at one year (p < 0.001). Mean SS. seated. increased from baseline (11.4° (SD 8.8°)) to one year after THA by 11.5° (SD 7.4°) (p < 0.001), which correlates to an 8.5° (SD 5.5°) mean decrease in seated functional cup anteversion. Contralateral hip OA was the only radiological predictor of hypermobility persisting at one year after surgery. The overall reoperation rate was 1.5%. Conclusion. Spinopelvic hypermobility was found to resolve in the majority (95%) of patients one year after THA. The increase in SS. seated. was clinically significant, suggesting that current target recommendations for the hypermobile patient (decreased anteversion and inclination) should be revisited. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1766–1773

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

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. The aims of this study were to measure sagittal standing and sitting lumbar-pelvic-femoral alignment in patients before and following total hip arthroplasty (THA), and to consider what preoperative factors may influence a change in postoperative pelvic position. Patients and Methods. A total of 161 patients were considered for inclusion. Patients had a mean age of the remaining 61 years (. sd. 11) with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 28 kg/m. 2. (. sd. 6). Of the 161 patients, 82 were male (51%). We excluded 17 patients (11%) with spinal conditions known to affect lumbar mobility as well as the rotational axis of the spine. Standing and sitting spine-to-lower-limb radiographs were taken of the remaining 144 patients before and one year following THA. Spinopelvic alignment measurements, including sacral slope, lumbar lordosis, and pelvic incidence, were measured. These angles were used to calculate lumbar spine flexion and femoroacetabular hip flexion from a standing to sitting position. A radiographic scoring system was used to identify those patients in the series who had lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) and compare spinopelvic parameters between those patients with DDD (n = 38) and those who did not (n = 106). Results. Following THA, patients sat with more anterior pelvic tilt (mean increased sacral slope 18° preoperatively versus 23° postoperatively; p = 0.001) and more lumbar lordosis (mean 28° preoperatively versus 35° postoperatively; p = 0.001). Preoperative change in sacral slope from standing to sitting (p = 0.03) and the absence of DDD (p = 0.001) correlated to an increased change in postoperative sitting pelvic alignment. Conclusion. Sitting lumbar-pelvic-femoral alignment following THA may be driven by hip arthritis and/or spinal deformity. Patients with DDD and fixed spinopelvic alignment have a predictable pelvic position one year following THA. Patients with normal spines have less predictable postoperative pelvic position, which is likely to be driven by hip stiffness. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1289–96

Aims. This study aimed to evaluate sagittal spinopelvic alignment (SSPA) in the early stage of rapidly destructive coxopathy (RDC) compared with hip osteoarthritis (HOA), and to identify risk factors of SSPA for destruction of the femoral head within 12 months after the disease onset. Methods. This study enrolled 34 RDC patients with joint space narrowing > 2 mm within 12 months after the onset of hip pain and 25 HOA patients showing femoral head destruction. Sharp angle was measured for acetabular coverage evaluation. Femoral head collapse ratio was calculated for assessment of the extent of femoral head collapse by RDC. The following parameters of SSPA were evaluated using the whole spinopelvic radiograph: pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), thoracic kyphosis angle (TK), lumbar lordosis angle (LL), and PI-LL. Results. The HOA group showed higher Sharp angles compared with the RDC group. PT and PI-LL were higher in the RDC group than the HOA group. SS and LL were lower in the RDC group than the HOA group. No difference was found in PI, SVA, or TK between the groups. Femoral head collapse ratio was associated with PT, SS, SVA, LL, and PI-LL. A PI-LL > 20° and a PT > 30° correlated with greater extent of femoral head destruction by RDC. From regression analysis, SS and SVA were significantly associated with the femoral head collapse ratio within 12 months after disease onset. Conclusion. Compared with HOA, RDC in the early stage correlated with sagittal spinopelvic malalignment. SS and SVA may partially contribute to the extent of femoral head destruction by RDC within 12 months after the onset of hip pain. The present study indicates a potential role of SSPA assessment in identification of RDC patients at risk for subsequent bone destruction. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(1):77–84

Aims. Patients with spinal pathology who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) have an increased risk of dislocation and revision. The aim of this study was to determine if the use of the Hip-Spine Classification system in these patients would result in a decreased rate of postoperative dislocation in patients with spinal pathology. Methods. This prospective, multicentre study evaluated 3,777 consecutive patients undergoing THA by three surgeons, between January 2014 and December 2019. They were categorized using The Hip-Spine Classification system: group 1 with normal spinal alignment; group 2 with a flatback deformity, group 2A with normal spinal mobility, and group 2B with a stiff spine. Flatback deformity was defined by a pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis of > 10°, and spinal stiffness was defined by < 10° change in sacral slope from standing to seated. Each category determined a patient-specific component positioning. Survivorship free of dislocation was recorded and spinopelvic measurements were compared for reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient. Results. A total of 2,081 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 987 group 1A, 232 group 1B, 715 group 2A, and 147 group 2B patients. A total of 70 patients had a lumbar fusion, most had L4-5 (16; 23%) or L4-S1 (12; 17%) fusions; 51 patients (73%) had one or two levels fused, and 19 (27%) had > three levels fused. Dual mobility (DM) components were used in 166 patients (8%), including all of those in group 2B and with > three level fusions. Survivorship free of dislocation at five years was 99.2% with a 0.8% dislocation rate. The correlation coefficient was 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 0.91). Conclusion. This is the largest series in the literature evaluating the relationship between hip-spine pathology and dislocation after THA, and guiding appropriate treatment. The Hip-Spine Classification system allows surgeons to make appropriate evaluations preoperatively, and it guides the use of DM components in patients with spinopelvic pathology in order to reduce the risk of dislocation in these high-risk patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):17–24

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

Variation in pelvic tilt during postural changes may affect functional alignment. The primary objective of this study was to quantify the changes in lumbo-pelvic-femoral alignment from sitting to standing in patients undergoing THA. 144 patients were enrolled. Standing and sitting radiographs using the EOS imaging system were analyzed preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), proximal femoral angle (PFA) and spine/femoroacetabular flexion were determined. 38 patients had multilevel DDD (26%). Following THA, patients sat with increased anterior pelvic tilt demonstrated by a significant increase in sitting lumbar lordosis (28° preop vs 35° postop; p<0.01) and sacral slope (18° vs 23°; p<0.01). Following THA, patients flexed less through their spines (preop 26° vs postop 19°; p<0.01) and more through their hips (femoroacetabular flexion) (preop 60° vs postop 67°; p<0.01) to achieve sitting position. Patients with multilevel DDD sat with less spine flexion (normal 22° vs spine 13°; p<0.01), less change in sacral slope (more relative anterior tilt) (17° vs 9°; p<0.01), and more femoroacetabular flexion (64° vs 71°; p<0.01). For the majority of patients after THA, a larger proportion of lumbo-pelvic-femoral flexion necessary to achieve a sitting position is derived from femoroacetabular flexion with an associated increase in anterior pelvic tilt and a decrease in lumbar spine flexion. These changes are more pronounced among patients with multilevel DDD. Surgeons may consider orienting the acetabular component with greater anteversion and inclination in patients identified preoperatively to have anterior pelvic tilt or significant DDD

This matched cohort study aims to (a) assess differences in spinopelvic characteristics of patients having sustained a dislocation following THA and a control THA group without dislocation; (b) identify spinopelvic characteristics associated with risk of dislocation and; (c) propose an algorithm to define the optimum cup orientation for minimizing dislocation risk. Fifty patients with a history of THA dislocation (29 posterior-, 21 anterior dislocations) were matched for age, gender, body mass index, index diagnosis, and femoral head size with 100 controls. All patients were reviewed and underwent detailed quasi-static radiographic evaluations of the coronal- (offset; center-of-rotation; cup inclination/anteversion) and sagittal- reconstructions (pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, pelvic-femoral-angle, cup ante-inclination). The spinopelvic balance (PI-LL), combined sagittal index (CSI= Pelvic-femoral-angle + Cup Anteinclination) and Hip-User-Index were determined. sagittal index (CSI= Pelvic-femoral-angle + Cup Anteinclination) and Hip-User-Index were determined. Parameters were compared between the two groups (2-group analysis) and between controls and per direction of dislocation (3-group analysis). There were marginal coronal differences between the groups. Sagittal parameters (lumbar-lordosis, pelvic-tilt, CSI, PI-LL and Hip-User-Index) differed significantly. PI-LL (>10°) and standing pelvic tilt (>18°) were the strongest predictors of dislocation risk (sensistivity:70%/specificity:70%). All hips with a standing CSI<195° dislocated posteriorly and all with CSI>260° dislocated anteriorly. A CSI between 200–245° was associated with significantly reduced risk of dislocation (OR:6; 95%CI:2.5–15.0; p<0.001). In patients with unbalanced and/or rigid lumbar spine, standing CSI of 215–245° was associated with significantly reduced dislocation risk (OR:10; 95%CI:3.2–29.8; p<0.001). PI-LL and standing pelvic-tilt determined from pre-operative, standing, lateral spinopelvic radiograph can be useful screening tools, alerting surgeons of patients at increased dislocation risk. Measurement of the pelvic-femoral angle pre-operatively provides valuable information to determine the optimum, cup orientation associated with reduced dislocation risk by aiming for a standing CSI of 200–245°

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. The aims of the study were to determine the differences in spinopelvic mobility between a cohort of hip OA patients and a control group for the 1) standing to relaxed-seated and 2) standing to deep-seated task. Methods. A cohort of 40 patients with end-stage hip OA and a control group of 40 subjects, matched for age, gender and BMI were prospectively studied. Clinical data and lateral view radiographs in different positions were assessed. Sagittal spinopelvic mobility was calculated as the change when moving from the standing to relaxed-seated and standing to deep-seated positions for the lumbar lordosis angle, pelvic tilt and pelvic-femoral angle. Results. When moving from the standing to sitting position, hip OA patients demonstrated less hip flexion (52±18 vs. 69±11, p<0.001), an increased posterior pelvic tilt (23±13 vs. 12±9, p<0.001) and more flexion of the lumbar spine (22±15 vs. 14±11, p=0.01). Similarly, when moving from the standing to deep-seated position, hip OA patients demonstrated also less hip flexion (64±21 vs. 84±18, p<0.001), accompanied by a posterior and not an anterior pelvic tilt as in the control group (10±16 vs. −3±17, p<0.001). No difference could be found for lumbar spine flexion (40±15 vs. 43±13, p=0.28). The percentage of subjects with stiff spinopelvic mobility was significantly lower in the patient group (15% vs 48%; p=0.002) and there was a trend towards a higher percentage in spinopelvic hypermobility in patients (20% vs 2%; p=0.08). Conclusions. Decreased hip flexion due to OA leads to an increased posterior pelvic tilt when taking a relaxed-seated position. Less than 10° of posterior pelvic tilt from the standing to relaxed seated position (spinopelvic ‘stiffness’) is more frequent in controls without hip OA and results from hip mobility and not from stiffness of the lumbar spine

Introduction. Spinopelvic mobility has been associated with THA outcome. To-date spine assessments have been made quasi-statically, using radiographs, in standing and seated positions but dynamic spinopelvic mobility has not been well explored. This study aims to determine the association between dynamic (motion analysis) and quasi-static (radiographic) sagittal assessments and examine the association between axial and sagittal spinal kinematics in hip OA patients and controls. Methods. This is a prospective, IRB approved, cohort study of 12 patients with hip OA pre-THA (6F/6M, 67±10 years) and six healthy controls (3F/3M, 46±18 years). All underwent lateral spinopelvic radiographs in standing and seated bend-and-reach (SBR) positions. Pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic-femoral-angle (PFA) and lumbar lordosis (LL) angles were measured in both positions and the differences (Δ) in angles between SBR and standing were computed. All participants performed two dynamic tasks at the motion laboratory: seated maximal trunk rotation (STR) and seated bend and reach (SBR). Three-dimensional joint motion data were collected and processed by a 10-camera infrared motion analysis system (Vicon, Nexus 2.10, UK). Total axial and sagittal spine (mid-thoracic to lumbar) range of motion (ROM) were calculated for STR and SBR, respectively. Results. ΔLL for SBR and motion analysis spinal flexion for SBR moderately correlated (ρ=0.4, p=0.007). Dynamic spinal rotation and flexion significantly, strongly, correlated (ρ=0.6 p=0.007). OA patients compared to healthy participants showed significant less ΔPFA (53°±21° vs. 77°±14°; p<0.001); ΔPT (−17°±8° vs. 9°±15°; p<0.001), ΔLL (35°±15° vs. 43° ±9°; p<0.001), axial spinal rotation during STR (62° ±12°vs. 79° ±8°, p<.001) and less, but not significant, spine flexion during SBR (36° ±15° vs. 44° ±10°, P=.1). Conclusion. Dynamic sagittal and axial spinal ROM showed moderately correlated. Motion analysis can provide valid assessments for spine mobility. OA patients compared to healthy participants showed significant less ΔPFA, ΔPT, ΔLL, axial spinal rotation during STR. Surgeons should be aware that patients with less spine mobility that could affect the stability of THA and increase the risk of poor outcomes

Purpose. Spinopelvic parameters are associated with the development of symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement and subsequent osteoarthritis. Pelvic incidence (PI) characterizes the sagittal profile of the pelvis and is important in the regulation of both lumbar lordosis and pelvic orientation (i.e. tilt). The purpose of this imaging-based study was to test the association between PI and acetabular morphology. Methods. Measurements of the pelvis and acetabulum were performed for 96 control patients and 29 hip dysplasia patients using 3D-computed topography (3D-CT) scans. Using previously validated measurements the articular cartilage and cotyloid fossa area of the acetabulum, functional acetabular version/inclination, acetabular depth, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, and PI were calculated. Non-parametric statistical tests were used; significance was set at p<0.05. Results. Of the 125 scans analyzed in this study, 65% were females and the average age was 24.8±6.0 years old. Thirty-six (14.4%) hips had acetabular retroversion; 178 (71.2%) had normal acetabular version; and 36 (14.4%) had high acetabular anteversion. Acetabular version moderately correlated with pelvic incidence; (Sρearman= 0.4; p<0.001). Patients with acetabular retroversion had significantly lower PI (44.2. °. ; 95% CI 41.0–47.4. °. ), compared to those with normal acetabular version (49.4. °. ; 95% CI 47.8–51.0. °. ) (p=0.004). Patients with normal version had significantly lower PI compared to those with high acetabular anteversion (56.4. °. ; 95% CI 52.8–60.0. °. ) (p<0.001). A significant difference in pelvic tilt between the groups (retroversion: 3±7; normal: 9±6; high version: 17±7) (p<0.001) was noted. Acetabular depth inversely and weakly correlated with pelvic incidence (ρ= −0.2; p=0.001). No other of the acetabular parameter correlated with the spinopelvic parameters tested. Conclusion. This is the first study to demonstrate the association between PI and functional acetabular version using 3D-CT scans. The results of this study illustrate the importance of PI as a descriptor of both pelvic and acetabular morphology and function

Introduction. The changes in sagittal spino-pelvic balance from standing to sitting in patients with end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip remain poorly characterized. Our aim was to 1) investigate the contribution of sagittal spino-pelvic movement and hip flexion when moving from a standing to sitting posture in patients with hip OA; 2) determine the proportion of OA-patients with stiff, normal or hypermobile spino-pelvic mobility and 3) identify radiographic parameters correlating with spino-pelvic mobility. Methods. This prospective diagnostic cohort study followed 116 consecutive patients with end-stage osteoarthritis awaiting THR. All patients underwent preoperative standardized radiographs (lateral view) of the lumbar spine, pelvis and proximal femur using EOS© in standing position and with femurs parallel to the floor in order to achieve a 90°-seated position. Radiographic measurements performed included lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI) and pelvic-femoral-angle (PFA). The difference in PT between standing and seated allowed for patient classification based on spino-pelvic mobility into stiff (<±10°), normal (±10–30°), or hypermobile (>±30°). Results. From the standing to the sitting position, the pelvis tilted backwards by a mean of 19.1° (SD 12.8) and the hip was flexed by a mean of 56.6° (SD 17.2). Change in pelvic tilt correlated inversely with change in hip flexion (r=−0.68; P<0.01; r. 2. =0.47). Thirty-two patients (28%) had stiff, 68 (58%) normal and 16 (14%) hypermobile spino-pelvic mobility. Multivariate regression analysis adjusted for patient age, BMI, static LL, SS, PI, PT and PFA showed a correlation for static standing SS and the change in PT (p=0.03; β=2.31; r. 2. =0.34). Conclusion. Hip flexion contributes on average 75% (25–100%) of the motion required to sit upright. Pre-operative assessment would identify patients with spino-pelvic hypermobility (associated greater change in cup orientation) or stiffness (associated increased hip range-of-movement), which would be at greater risk of dislocation

Aims

Adverse spinal motion or balance (spine mobility) and adverse pelvic mobility, in combination, are often referred to as adverse spinopelvic mobility (SPM). A stiff lumbar spine, large posterior standing pelvic tilt, and severe sagittal spinal deformity have been identified as risk factors for increased hip instability. Adverse SPM can create functional malposition of the acetabular components and hence is an instability risk. Adverse pelvic mobility is often, but not always, associated with abnormal spinal motion parameters. Dislocation rates for dual-mobility articulations (DMAs) have been reported to be between 0% and 1.1%. The aim of this study was to determine the early survivorship from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) of patients with adverse SPM who received a DMA.

Aims

The effect of pelvic tilt (PT) and sagittal balance in hips with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with acetabular retroversion (AR) is controversial. It is unclear if patients with AR have a rotational abnormality of the iliac wing. Therefore, we asked: are parameters for sagittal balance, and is rotation of the iliac wing, different in patients with AR compared to a control group?; and is there a correlation between iliac rotation and acetabular version?

Aims

It has been well documented in the arthroplasty literature that lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) contributes to abnormal spinopelvic motion. However, the relationship between the severity or pattern of hip osteoarthritis (OA) as measured on an anteroposterior (AP) pelvic view and spinopelvic biomechanics has not been well investigated. Therefore, the aim of the study is to examine the association between the severity and pattern of hip OA and spinopelvic motion.