Dislocation is one of the most common complications in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and is primarily driven by bony or prosthetic impingement. The aim of this study was two-fold. First, to develop a simulation that incorporates the functional position of the femur and pelvis and instantaneously determines range of motion (ROM) limits. Second, to assess the number of patients for whom their functional bony alignment escalates impingement risk. 468 patients underwent a preoperative THA planning protocol that included functional x-rays and a lower limb CT scan. The CT scan was segmented and landmarked, and the x-rays were measured for pelvic tilt, femoral rotation, and preoperative leg length discrepancy (LLD). All patients received 3D templating with the same implant combination (Depuy; Corail/Pinnacle). Implants were positioned according to standardised criteria. Each patient was simulated in a novel ROM simulation that instantaneously calculates bony and prosthetic impingement limits in functional movements. Simulated motions included flexion and standing-external rotation (ER). Each patient's ROM was simulated with their bones oriented in both functional and neutral positions. 13% patients suffered a ROM impingement for functional but not neutral extension-ER. As a result, 48% patients who failed the functional-ER simulation would not be detected without consideration of the functional bony alignment. 16% patients suffered a ROM impingement for functional but not neutral flexion. As a result, 65% patients who failed the flexion simulation would not be detected without consideration of the functional bony alignment. We have developed a ROM simulation for use with preoperative planning for THA surgery that can solve bony and prosthetic impingement limits instantaneously. The advantage of our ROM simulation over previous simulations is instantaneous impingement detection, not requiring implant geometries to be analysed prior to use, and addressing the functional position of both the femur and pelvis.
Iliopsoas tendonitis occurs in up to 30% of patients after hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) and is a common reason for revision. The primary purpose of this study was to validate our novel computational model for quantifying iliopsoas impingement in HRA patients using a case-controlled investigation. Secondary purpose was to compare these results with previously measured THA patients. We conducted a retrospective search in an experienced surgeon's database for HRA patients with iliopsoas tendonitis, confirmed via the active hip flexion test in supine, and control patients without iliopsoas tendonitis, resulting in two cohorts of 12 patients. The CT scans were segmented, landmarked, and used to simulate the iliopsoas impingement in supine and standing pelvic positions. Three discrete impingement values were output for each pelvic position, and the mean and maximum of these values were reported. Cup prominence was measured using a novel, nearest-neighbour algorithm. The mean cup prominence for the symptomatic cohort was 10.7mm and 5.1mm for the asymptomatic cohort (p << 0.01). The average standing mean impingement for the symptomatic cohort was 0.1mm and 0.0mm for the asymptomatic cohort (p << 0.01). The average standing maximum impingement for the symptomatic cohort was 0.2mm and 0.0mm for the asymptomatic cohort (p << 0.01). Impingement significantly predicted the probability of pain in logistic regression models and the simulation had a sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 91%, and an AUC ROC curve of 0.95. Using a case-controlled investigation, we demonstrated that our novel simulation could detect iliopsoas impingement and differentiate between the symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts. Interestingly, the HRA patients demonstrated less impingement than the THA patients, despite greater cup prominence. In conclusion, this tool has the potential to be used preoperatively, to guide decisions about optimal cup placement, and postoperatively, to assist in the diagnosis of iliopsoas tendonitis.
Iliopsoas impingement occurs in between 5–30% of patients after hip arthroplasty and has been thought to only be caused by an oversized cup, cup malpositioning, or the depth of the psoas valley. However, no study has associated the relationship between preoperative measurements with the risk of impingement. This study sought to assess impingement between the iliopsoas and acetabular cup using a novel validated model to determine the risk factors for iliopsoas impingement. 413 patients received lower limb CT scans and lateral x-rays that were segmented, landmarked, and measured using a validated preoperative planning protocol. Implants were positioned according to the preference of ten experienced surgeons. The segmented bones were transformed to the standing reference frame and simulated with a novel computational model that detects impingement between the iliopsoas and acetabular cup. Definitions of patients at-risk and not at-risk of impingement were defined from a previous validation study of the simulation. At-risk patients were propensity score matched to not at-risk patients. 21% of patients were assessed as being at-risk of iliopsoas impingement. Significant differences between at-risk patients and not at-risk patients were observed in standing pelvic tilt (p << 0.01), standing femoral internal rotation (p << 0.01), medio-lateral centre-of-rotation (COR) change (p << 0.01), supine cup anteversion (p << 0.01), pre- to postoperative cup offset change (p << 0.001), postoperative gross offset (p = 0.009), and supero-inferior COR change (p = 0.02). Impingement between the iliopsoas and acetabular cup is under-studied and may be more common than is published in the literature. Previously it has been thought to only be related to cup size or positioning. However, we have observed significant differences between at-risk and not at-risk patients in additional measurements. This indicates that its occurrence is more complex than simply being related to cup position.
In 2021, Vigdorchik et al. published a large multicentre study validating their simple Hip-Spine Classification for determining patient-specific acetabular component positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of our study was to apply this Hip-Spine Classification to a sample of Australian patients undergoing THA surgery to determine the local acetabular component positioning requirements. Additionally, we propose a modified algorithm for adjusting cup anteversion requirements. 790 patients who underwent THA surgery between January 2021 and June 2022 were assessed for anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPt) and sacral slope (SS) in standing and relaxed seated positions and categorized according to their spinal stiffness and flatback deformity. Spinal stiffness was measured using pelvic mobility (PM); the ΔSS between standing and relaxed seated. Flatback deformity was defined by APPt <-13° in standing. As in Vigdorchik et al., PM of <10° was considered a stiff spine. For our algorithm, PM of <20° indicated the need for increased cup anteversion. Using this approach, patient-specific cup anteversion is increased by 1° for every degree the patient's PM is <20°. According to the Vigdorchik simple Hip-Spine classification groups, we found: 73% Group 1A, 19% Group 1B, 5% Group 2A, and 3% Group 2B. Therefore, under this classification, 27% of Australian THA patients would have an elevated risk of dislocation due to spinal deformity and/or stiffness. Under our modified definition, 52% patients would require increased cup anteversion to address spinal stiffness. The Hip-Spine Classification is a simple algorithm that has been shown to indicate to surgeons when adjustments to acetabular cup anteversion are required to account for spinal stiffness or flatback deformity. We investigated this algorithm in an Australian population of patients undergoing THA and propose a modified approach: increasing cup anteversion by 1° for every degree the patient's PM is <20°.
The Intellijoint HIP system is a mini-optical navigation system designed to intraoperatively assist with cup orientation, leg length and offset in total hip replacement (THR). As with any imageless navigation system, acquiring the pelvic reference frame intraoperatively requires assumptions. The system does however have the ability to define the native acetabular orientation intra-operatively by registering 3-points along the bony rim. In conjunction with a pre-operative CT scan, the authors hypothesised that this native acetabular plane could be used as an intraoperative reference to achieve a planned patient-specific cup orientation. Thirty-eight THR patients received preoperative OPSTM dynamic planning (Optimized Ortho, Sydney). On the pre-operative 3D model of each patient's acetabulum, a 3-point plane was defined by selecting recognisable features on the bony rim. The difference in inclination and anteversion angles between this native 3-point reference plane and the desired optimal orientation was pre-operatively calculated, and reported to the surgeon as “adjustment angles”. Intraoperatively, the surgeon tried to register the same 3-points on the bony rim. Knowing the intraoperative native acetabular orientation, the surgeon applied the pre-calculated adjustment angles to achieve the planned patient specific cup orientation. All patients received a post-operative CT scan at one-week and the deviation between planned and achieved cup orientation was measured. Additionally, the cup orientation that would have been achieved if the standard Intellijoint pelvic acquisition was performed was retrospectively determined.Introduction
Method