Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 6 - 6
1 Feb 2021
Madurawe C Vigdorchik J Lee G Jones T Dennis D Austin M Pierrepont J Huddleston J
Full Access

Introduction. Excessive standing posterior pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar spine stiffness, low pelvic Incidence (PI), and severe sagittal spinal deformity (SSD) have been linked to increased dislocation rates. We aimed to compare the prevalence of these 4 parameters in unstable and stable primary Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) patients. Methods. In this retrospective cohort study, 40 patients with instability following primary THA for osteoarthritis were referred for functional analysis. All patients received lateral X-rays in standing and flexed seated positions to assess functional pelvic tilt and lumbar lordosis (LL). Computed tomography scans were used to measure pelvic incidence and acetabular cup orientation. Literature thresholds for “at risk” spinopelvic parameters were standing pelvic tilt ≤ −10°, lumbar flexion (LL. stand. – LL. seated. ) ≤ 20°, PI ≤ 41°, and sagittal spinal deformity (PI – LL. stand. mismatch) ≥ 10°. The prevalence of each risk factor in the dislocation cohort was calculated and compared to a previously published cohort of 4042 stable THA patients. Results. Median supine cup inclination for the dislocating cohort was 43° (range, 26°- 58°). Median cup anteversion was 23° (range, 7° − 40°) for the dislocating cohort. 65% of the dislocating patients had socket positions within the Lewinnek safe zone (Figure 1). Standing PT (-10° v −1°), lumbar flexion (20° v 45°), and PI-LL mismatch (12° v −1°) were all significantly different (p < 0.001) in the dislocating group compared to the stable THA population (Figure 2). There was no difference in PI between the dislocating group and the stable THA population (58° v 56° respectively, p = 0.33), with the numbers available. 80% of the dislocating patients had one or more of the 3 statistically significant risk factors, compared to only 24% of the stable THA population. Conclusion. Excessive standing posterior pelvic tilt, low lumbar flexion and a severe SSD are highly prevalent in unstable THAs. Pre-op screening for these parameters may reduce the prevalence of dislocation. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_3 | Pages 28 - 28
1 Mar 2021
El-Hawary R Padhye K Howard J Ouellet J Saran N Abraham E Manson N Peterson D Missiuna P Hedden D Alkhalife Y Viswanathan V Parsons D Ferri-de-Barros F Jarvis J Moroz P Parent S Mac-Thiong J Hurry J Orlik B Bailey K Chorney J
Full Access

Proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) is defined as adjacent segment kyphosis >10° between the upper instrumented vertebrae and the vertebrae 2 levels above following scoliosis surgery. There are few studies investigating the predictors and clinical sequelae involved with this relatively common complication. Our purpose was to determine the radiographic predictors of post-op PJK and to examine the association between PJK and pain/HRQOL following surgery for AIS. The Post-Operative Recovery after Scoliosis Correction: Home Experience (PORSCHE) study was a prospective multicenter cohort of AIS patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery. Pre-op and minimum 2 year f/u scoliosis and sagittal spinopelvic parameters (thoracic kyphosis–TK, lordosis–LL, pelvic tilt-PT, sacral slope-SS, pelvic incidence-PI) were measured and compared to numeric rating scale for pain (NRS) score, SRS-30 HRQOL and to the presence or absence of PJK (proximal junctional angle >100). Continuous and categorical variables were assessed using logistic regression and binomial variables were compared to binomial outcomes using chi-square. 163 (137 females) patients from 8 Canadian centers met inclusion criteria. At final f/u, PJK was present in 27 patients (17%). Pre-op means for PJK vs No PJK: Age 14.1 vs 14.7yr; females 85 vs 86%; scoliosis 57±22 vs 62±15deg; TK 28±18 vs 19±16deg ∗, LL 62±11 vs 60±12deg, PT 8±12 vs 10±10deg, SS 39±8 vs 41±9deg, PI 47±14 vs 52±13deg, SVA −9±30 vs −7±31mm. Final f/u for PJK vs No PJK: Scoliosis 20±11 vs 18±8deg, final TK 26±12 vs 19±10deg∗, LL 60±11 vs 57±12deg, PT 9±12 vs 12±13deg, SS 39±9 vs 41±9deg, PI 48±17 vs 52±14deg, SVA −23±26 vs −9±32mm∗. Significant findings: Pre-op kyphosis >40deg has an odds ratio (OR) of 4.41 (1.50–12.92) for developing PJK∗. The presence of PJK was not associated with any significant differences in NRS or SRS-30. ∗denotes p<0.05. This prospective multicenter cohort of AIS patients demonstrated a 17% risk of developing PJK. Pre-op thoracic kyphosis >40deg was associated with the development of PJK; however, the presence of PJK was not associated with increased pain or decreased HRQOL


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXVIII | Pages 210 - 210
1 Sep 2012
El-Hawary R Sturm P Cahill PJ Samdani A Vitale MG Gabos PG Bodin N d'Amato C Smith J Harris C
Full Access

Purpose. Spinopelvic parameters describe the orientation, shape, and morphology of the spine and pelvis. In children without spinal deformity, these parameters have been shown to change during the first ten years of life; however, spinopelvic parameters have yet to be defined in children with significant Early Onset Scoliosis (EOS). The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of EOS on sagittal spinopelvic alignment. Method. Standing, lateral radiographs of 82 untreated patients with EOS greater than 50 degrees were evaluated. Sagittal spine parameters (sagittal balance, thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL)) and sagittal pelvic parameters (pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), modified pelvic radius angle (PR)) were measured. These results were compared to those reported by Mac-Thiong et al (Spine, 2004) for a group of asymptomatic (i.e. without spinal deformity) children of similar age. Results. These patients had a mean age of 5.17 years and mean scoliosis of 73.3 17.3. Mean sagittal spine parameters were: sagittal balance (+2.4 4.03 cm), TK (38.2 20.8), and LL (47.8 17.7). These values were similar to those reported for asymptomatic subjects. Mean sagittal pelvic parameters were measured for PI (47.1 15.6), PT (10.3 10.7), SS (35.5 12.2), and PR (57.1 21.2). Although PI was similar to age-matched normals, PT was significantly higher and SS trended lower in the study population. Conclusion. Sagittal plane spine parameters in children with EOS were similar to those found in children without spinal deformity. Likewise, pelvic parameters (PI, SS, PR) were similar; however, those children with EOS signs of pelvic retroversion (increased pelvic tilt). This data may be useful as a baseline in determining prognosis for children with EOS who are treated with growing systems


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1261 - 1267
14 Sep 2020
van Erp JHJ Gielis WP Arbabi V de Gast A Weinans H Arbabi S Öner FC Castelein RM Schlösser TPC

Aims. The aetiologies of common degenerative spine, hip, and knee pathologies are still not completely understood. Mechanical theories have suggested that those diseases are related to sagittal pelvic morphology and spinopelvic-femoral dynamics. The link between the most widely used parameter for sagittal pelvic morphology, pelvic incidence (PI), and the onset of degenerative lumbar, hip, and knee pathologies has not been studied in a large-scale setting. Methods. A total of 421 patients from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) database, a population-based observational cohort, with hip and knee complaints < 6 months, aged between 45 and 65 years old, and with lateral lumbar, hip, and knee radiographs available, were included. Sagittal spinopelvic parameters and pathologies (spondylolisthesis and degenerative disc disease (DDD)) were measured at eight-year follow-up and characteristics of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) at baseline and eight-year follow-up. Epidemiology of the degenerative disorders and clinical outcome scores (hip and knee pain and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) were compared between low PI (< 50°), normal PI (50° to 60°), and high PI (> 60°) using generalized estimating equations. Results. Demographic details were not different between the different PI groups. L4 to L5 and L5 to S1 spondylolisthesis were more frequently present in subjects with high PI compared to low PI (L4 to L5, OR 3.717; p = 0.024 vs L5 to S1 OR 7.751; p = 0.001). L5 to S1 DDD occurred more in patients with low PI compared to high PI (OR 1.889; p = 0.010), whereas there were no differences in L4 to L5 DDD among individuals with a different PI. The incidence of hip OA was higher in participants with low PI compared to normal (OR 1.262; p = 0.414) or high PI (OR 1.337; p = 0.274), but not statistically different. The incidence of knee OA was higher in individuals with a high PI compared to low PI (OR 1.620; p = 0.034). Conclusion. High PI is a risk factor for development of spondylolisthesis and knee OA. Low pelvic incidence is related to DDD, and may be linked to OA of the hip. Level of Evidence: 1b. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1261–1267


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 47 - 47
1 Feb 2021
Catelli D Grammatopoulos G Cotter B Mazuchi F Beaule P Lamontagne M
Full Access

Introduction. Interactions between hip, pelvis and spine, as abnormal spinopelvic movements, have been associated with inferior outcomes following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Changes in pelvis position lead to a mutual change in functional cup orientation, with both pelvic tilt and rotation having a significant effect on version. Hip osteoarthritis (OA) patients have shown reduced hip kinematics which may place increased demands on the pelvis and the spine. Sagittal and coronal planes assessments are commonly done as these can be adequately studied with anteroposterior and lateral radiographs. However, abnormal pelvis rotation is likely to compromise the outcome as they have a detrimental effect on cup orientation and increased impingement risk. This study aims to determine the association between dynamic motion and radiographic sagittal assessments; and examine the association between axial and sagittal spinal and pelvic kinematics between hip OA patients and healthy controls (CTRL). Methods. This is a prospective study, IRB approved. Twenty hip OA pre-THA patients (11F/9M, 67±9 years) and six CTRL (3F/3M, 46±18 years) 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) between standing and SBR were calculated. Dynamic SBR and seated maximal-trunk-rotation (STR) were recorded in the biomechanics laboratory using a 10-infrared camera and processed on a motion capture system (Vicon, UK). Direct kinematics extracted maximal pelvic tilt (PT. max. ), hip flexion (HF. max. ) and (mid-thoracic to lumbar) spinal flexion (SF. max. ). The SBR pelvic movement contribution (ΔPT. rel. ) was calculated as ΔPT/(ΔPT+ΔPFA)∗100 for the radiographic analysis and as PT. max. /(PT. max. +HF. max. ) for the motion analyses. Axial and sagittal, pelvic and spinal range of motion (ROM) were calculated for STR and SBR, respectively. Spearman's rank-order determined correlations between the spinopelvic radiographs and sagittal kinematics, and the sagittal/axial kinematics. Mann-Whitney U-tests compared measures between groups. Results. Radiograph readings correlated with sagittal kinematics during SBR for ΔPT and PT. max. (ρ=0.64, p<0.001), ΔPFA and HF. max. (ρ=0.44, p<0.0002), and ΔLL and SF. max. (ρ=0.34, p=0.002). Relative pelvic movements (ΔPT. rel. ) were not different between radiographic (11%±21) and biomechanical (15%±29) readings (p=0.9). Sagittal SRB spinal flexion correlated with the axial STR rotation (ρ=0.43, p<0.0001). Although not seen in CTRL, sagittal SRB pelvic flexion strongly correlated with STR pelvic rotation in OA patients (ρ=0.40, p=0.002). All spinopelvic parameters were different between the patients with OA and CTRL. CTRLs exhibited significantly greater mobility and less variability in all 3 segments (spine, pelvis, hip) and both planes (axial and sagittal) (Table 1). Conclusion. Correlation between sagittal kinematics and radiographical measurements during SBR validates the spinopelvic mobility assessments in the biomechanics laboratory. Axial kinematics of both pelvis and spine correlated significantly in OA patients, suggesting that patients with abnormal sagittal mobility are likely to also exhibit abnormal axial mobility, which can further potentiate any at-risk kinematics. Significantly lower OA ROM must be investigated post-THA. Pre-THA variability of both sagittal and axial movements indicates that both planes must be considered ahead of surgical planning with navigation and/or robotics. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 71 - 71
1 Apr 2019
Vigdorchik J Steinmetz L Zhou P Vasquez-Montes D Kingery MT Stekas N Frangella N Varlotta C Ge D Cizmic Z Lafage V Lafage R Passias PG Protopsaltis TS Buckland A
Full Access

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