The same cup orientation is classically applied to all cases of hip replacement (45° abduction, 20° anteversion). We hypothesize that this orientation must be adapted to the patient's hip range of motion. We tested this hypothesis by means of an experimental study with respect to hip range of motion, comparing the classical orientation (45° and 20°), and the orientation obtained with computer-assisted navigation. The experimental model included a hemipelvis equipped with a femur whose mobility was controlled for three configurations: stiff (60°/0°, 15°/10°, 10°/10°), average (80°/10°, 35°/30°,35°/25°), mobile (130°/30°, 50°/50°, 45°/35°). The hemipelvis and the cup holder were equipped with an electromagnetic system (Fastrack ™) to measure cup orientation. The Pleos™ navigation system (equipping the hemipelvis, the femur, and the cup holder) guided the cup orientation by detecting the positions risking impingement through a kinematic study of the hip. Nine operators each performed 18 navigation-guided implantations (162 hip abduction, anteversion, and range of movement measurements) in two series scheduled 2 months apart.Introduction
Material and Methods
The prosthetic impingement occurs if the range of motion of the hip exceeds implant mobility or in case of component malorientation. This retrieval study was designed to assess the frequency and the risk factors of this phenomenon. The frequency and the severity of the impingement were calculated from a continuous series of 311 cups retrievals collected between 1989 and 2004 by a single surgeon. The reason for retrieval was loosening (131 cases), infection (43 cases), instability (56 cases), osteolysis (28 cases), unexplained pain (48 cases) and prosthetic impingent (5 cases all with hard bearings). The notching at the cup rim was assessed twice by two examiners with optic magnification. The risk factors were analyzed from clinical charts by univariate and cox multihazard.Introduction
Material and Methods
