Symptomatic hip osteonecrosis is a disabling
condition with a poorly understood aetiology and pathogenesis. Numerous
treatment options for hip osteonecrosis are described, which include
non-operative management and joint preserving procedures, as well
as total hip replacement (THR). Non-operative or joint preserving
treatment may improve outcomes when an early diagnosis is made before
the lesion has become too large or there is radiographic evidence
of femoral head collapse. The presence of a crescent sign, femoral
head flattening, and acetabular involvement indicate a more advanced-stage
disease in which joint preserving options are less effective than
THR. Since many patients present after disease progression, primary
THR is often the only reliable treatment option available. Prior
to the 1990s, outcomes of THR for osteonecrosis were poor. However,
according to recent reports and systemic reviews, it is encouraging
that with the introduction of newer ceramic and/or highly cross-linked
polyethylene bearings as well as highly-porous fixation interfaces,
THR appears to be a reliable option in the management of end-stage
arthritis following hip osteonecrosis in this historically difficult
to treat patient population. Cite this article:
The mean pre and post-operative lumbar lordosis was 34.58 and 53.48 respectively. The mean sagittal rotation was 6.5 degrees at 5 year follow-up, while the mean translation was 0.83 mm. The mean AVM, MVM and PVM were 0.59 mm, −3.96 mm and 3.69 mm respectively at 5 year follow-up.
The following measurements were performed on the replaced motion segment using a lateral radiograph:
The anterior-posterior (AP) dimension of the end plates. Amount of subsidence. The distance between the TDA and the posterior and anterior borders of the vertebra bodies (to represent the extent of uncoverage of the endplate by the TDA). The AP dimension of the TDA metal endplate. The ratio between the actual and radiographic AP length of the metal endplate was calculated and utilized as the correction factor for the error of magnification on all other radiographic measurements.
At L4–L5 the mean subsidence was 1.48 mm (L4) and 0.56 mm (L5). Posterior uncoverage of L4 and L5 vertebrae were 4.81 and 2.22 mm, respectively. Subsidence of more than 1 mm was present in all cases where the posterior uncoverage of the end plate with the TDA was more than 2 mm (odds ratio: 5.7). Subsidence was non – progressive in all cases. An anatomic mismatch exists between L5 and S1 endplates in the AP dimension; in more than half the patients S1 is shorter than L5.