There is some evidence to suggest that outcomes of THA in patients with minimal radiographic osteoarthritis may not be associated with predictable outcomes. The aim of this study was to:

A retrospective review of 107 hips (102 patients, 90F:12M, median age 40.6, IQR 35.1–45.8 years, range 18–73) were included for analysis. Plain radiographs were evaluated using the Tonnis grading scale of hip OA. Outcome measures were all-cause revision; iHOT12; EQ-5D; Oxford Hip Score; UCLA Activity Scale; and whether THA had resulted in the patient's hip pain and function being Better/Same/Worse.

The median Oxford Hip Score was 33.3 (IQR 13.9, range 13–48), and 36/107 (33.6%) hips achieved an OHS≥42. There was no association between primary hip diagnosis and post-operative PROMs. A total of 91 of the 102 patients (89.2%, 93 hips) reported that their hip pain and function was Better than prior to THA and would have the surgery again, 7 patients (6.8%, 10 hips) felt the Same, and 4 patients (3.9%, 4 hips) felt Worse and would not have the surgery again.

Younger patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with no or minimal radiographic osteoarthritis had lower postoperative Oxford Hip Scores than the general population; though most felt symptomatically better and knowing what they know now, would have surgery again. Those with chronic pain syndrome or hypermobility were likely to benefit less. Those with subchondral cysts or joint space narrowing on CT imaging were more likely to achieve higher functional scores and satisfaction.

Acetabular retroversion is a recognised cause of hip impingement. Pelvic tilt influences acetabular orientation and is known to change in different functional positions. While previously reported in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip, positional changes in pelvic tilt have not been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion.

We retrospectively analysed supine and standing AP pelvic radiographs in 22 patients with preoperative radiographs and 47 with post-operative radiographs treated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion. Measurements were made for acetabular index (AI), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), crossover index, ischial spine sign, and posterior wall sign. The change in pelvic tilt angle was measured both by the Sacro-Femoral-Pubic (SFP) angle and the Pubic Symphysis to Sacro-iliac (PS-SI) Index.

In the supine position, the mean calculated pelvic tilt angle (by SFP) was 1.05° which changed on standing to a pelvic tilt of 8.64°. A significant increase in posterior pelvic tilt angle from supine to standing of 7.59° (SFP angle) and 5.89° (PS –SI index) was calculated (p<0.001;paired t-test). There was a good correlation in pelvic tilt change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (rho .901 in pre-op group, rho .815 in post-op group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing x-rays compared to supine: Crossover index (0.16 vs 0.38; p<0.001) crossover sign (19/28 vs 28/28 hips; p<0.001), ischial spine sign (10/28 hips vs 26/28 hips; p<0.001) and posterior wall sign (12/28 vs 24/28 hips; p<0.001).

Posterior pelvic tilt increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion, in keeping with previous studies of pelvic tilt change in patients with hip dysplasia. The features of acetabular retroversion were much less evident on standing radiographs. The low pelvic tilt angle in the supine position is implicated in the appearance of acetabular retroversion in the supine position. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs so as not to miss signs of retroversion and to assist with optimising acetabular correction at the time of surgery.

Acetabular retroversion is a recognised cause of hip impingement. Pelvic tilt influences acetabular orientation and is known to change in different functional positions. While previously reported in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip, positional changes in pelvic tilt have not been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion.

We retrospectively analysed supine and standing AP pelvic radiographs in 22 patients with preoperative radiographs and 47 with post-operative radiographs treated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion. Measurements were made for acetabular index (AI), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), crossover index, ischial spine sign, and posterior wall sign. The change in pelvic tilt angle was measured both by the Sacro-Femoral-Pubic (SFP) angle and the Pubic Symphysis to Sacro-iliac (PS-SI) Index.

In the supine position, the mean calculated pelvic tilt angle (by SFP) was 1.05° which changed on standing to a pelvic tilt of 8.64°. A significant increase in posterior pelvic tilt angle from supine to standing of 7.59° (SFP angle) and 5.89° (PS –SI index) was calculated (p<0.001;paired t-test). The mean pelvic tilt change of 6.51° measured on post-operative Xrays was not significantly different (p=.650). There was a good correlation in pelvic tilt change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (rho .901 in pre-op group, rho .815 in post-op group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing x-rays compared to supine: Crossover index (0.16 vs 0.38; p<0.001) crossover sign (19/28 vs 28/28 hips; p<0.001), ischial spine sign (10/28 hips vs 26/28 hips; p<0.001) and posterior wall sign (12/28 vs 24/28 hips; p<0.001).

Posterior pelvic tilt increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion, in keeping with previous studies of pelvic tilt change in patients with hip dysplasia. The features of acetabular retroversion were much less evident on standing radiographs. The low pelvic tilt angle in the supine position is implicated in the appearance of acetabular retroversion in the supine position. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs so as not to miss signs of retroversion and to assist with optimising acetabular correction at the time of surgery.