Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
General Orthopaedics

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 104 - 104
1 Feb 2017
Lazennec J Thauront F Folinais D Pour A
Full Access

Introduction

Optimal implant position is the important factor in the hip stability after THA. Both the acetabular and femoral implants are placed in anteversion. While most hip dislocations occur either in standing position or when the hip is flexed, preoperative hip anatomy and postoperative implants position are commonly measured in supine position with CT scan. The isolated and combined anteversions of femoral and acetabular components have been reported in the literature. The conclusions are questionable as the reference planes are not consistent: femoral anteversion is measured according to the distal femoral condyles plane (DFCP) and acetabulum orientation in the anterior pelvic plane (APP)). The EOS imaging system allows combined measurements for standing position in the “anatomical” reference plane or anterior pelvic plane (APP) or in the patient “functional” plane (PFP) defined as the horizontal plane passing through both femoral heads. The femoral anteversion can also be measured conventionally according to the DFCP. The objective of the study was to determine the preoperative and postoperative acetabular, femoral and combined hip anteversions, sacral slope, pelvic incidence and pelvic tilt in patients who undergo primary THA.

Material and Methods

The preoperative and postoperative 3D EOS images were assessed in 62 patients (66 hips). None of these patients had spine or lower extremity surgery other than THA surgery in between the 2 EOS assessments. None had dislocation within the follow up time period.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 105 - 105
1 Feb 2017
Lazennec J Fourchon N Folinais D Pour A
Full Access

Introduction

Limb length discrepancy after THA can result in medicolegal litigation. It can create discomfort for the patient and potentially cause back pain or affect the longevity of the implant. Some patients tolerate the length inequality better compared to others despite difference in anatomical femoral length after surgery.

Methods and materials

We analyzed the 3D EOS images of 75 consecutive patients who underwent primary unilateral THA (27 men, 48 women). We measured the 3D length of the femur and tibia (anatomical length), the 3D global anatomical length (the sum of femur and tibia anatomical lengths), the 3D functional length (center of the femoral head to center of the ankle), femoral neck-shaft angle, hip-knee-ankle angle, knee flexum/recurvatum angle, sacral slopes and pelvic incidence. We correlated these parameters with the patient perception of the leg length.