Unknown femur orientation during X-ray imaging may cause inaccurate radiographic measurements. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of 3D femur orientation during radiographic imaging on the measurement of greater trochanter to femoral head centre (GT-FHC) distance.

Three-dimensional femoral shapes (n=100) of unknown gender were generated using a statistical shape model based on a training data of 47 CT segmented femora. Rotations in the range of 0° internal to 50° external and 50° of flexion to 0° of extension (at 10 degree increments) were applied to each femur. A ray tracing algorithm was then used to create 2D images representing radiographs of the femora in known 3D orientations. The GT-FHC distance was then measured automatically by identifying the femoral head, shaft axis and tip of greater trochanter.

Uniaxial rotations had little impact on the measurement with mean absolute error of 0.6 mm and 3.1 mm for 50° for pure external rotation and 50° pure flexion, respectively. Combined flexion and external rotation yielded more significant errors with 10° around each axis introducing a mean error of 3.6 mm and 20° showing an average error of 8.8 mm (Figure 1.). In the cohort we studied, when the femur was in neutral orientation, the tip of greater trochanter was never below the femoral head centre.

Greater trochanter to femoral head centre measurement was insensitive to rotations around a single axis (i.e. flexion or external rotation). Modest combined rotations caused the tip of greater trochanter to appear more distal in 2D and led to deviation from the true value. This study suggests that a radiograph with the greater trochanter appearing below femoral head centre may have been acquired with 3D rotation of the femur.

For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly by clicking on ‘Info & Metrics’ above to access author contact details.

Anterior-posterior (AP) x-rays are routinely taken following total hip replacement to assess placement and orientation of implanted components. Pelvic orientation at the time of an AP x-ray can influence projected implant orientation.¹However, the extent of pelvic orientation varies between patients.²Without compensation for patient specific pelvic orientation, misleading measurements for implant orientation may be obtained. These measurements are used as indicators for post-operative dislocation stability and range of motion. Errors in which could result in differences between expectations and the true outcome achieved. The aim of this research was to develop a tool that could be utilised to determine pelvic orientation from an AP x-ray.

An algorithm based on comparing projections of a statistical shape model of the pelvis (n=20) with the target X-ray was developed in MATLAB. For each iteration, the average shape was adjusted, rotated (to account for patient-specific pelvic orientation), projected onto a 2D plane, and the simulated outline determined. With respect to rotation, the pelvis was allowed to rotate about its transverse axis (pelvic flexion/extension) and anterior-posterior axis (pelvic adduction/abduction). Minimum root mean square error between the outline of the pelvis from the X-ray and the projected shape model outline was used to select final values for flexion and adduction. To test the algorithm, virtual X-rays (n=6) of different pelvis in known orientations were created using the algorithm described by Freud et al.³The true pelvic orientation for each case was randomly generated. Angular error was defined as the difference between the true pelvic orientation and that selected by the algorithm.

Initial testing has exhibited similar accuracy in determining true pelvic flexion (x̄_error = 2.74°, σ_error=±2.21°) and true pelvic adduction (x̄_error = 2.38°, σ_error=±1.76°). For both pelvic flexion and adduction the maximum angular error observed was 5.62°. The minimum angular error for pelvic flexion was 0.37°, whilst for pelvic adduction it was 1.08°.

Although the algorithm is still under development, the low mean, maximum, and standard deviations of error from initial testing indicate the approach is promising. Ongoing work will involve the use of additional landmarks for registration and training shapes to improve the shape model. This tool will allow surgeons to more accurately determine true acetabular orientation relative to the pelvis without the use of additional x-ray views or CT scans. In turn, this will help improve diagnoses of post-operative range of motion and dislocation stability.

Ideal placement of the acetabular component remains elusive both in terms of defining and achieving a target. Our aim is to help restore original anatomy by using the transverse acetabular ligament (TAL) to control the height, depth and version of the component. In the normal hip the TAL and labrum extend beyond the equator of the femoral head and therefore, if the definitive acetabular component is positioned such that it is cradled by and just deep to the plane of the TAL and labrum and is no more than 4mm larger than the original femoral head, the centre of the hip should be restored. If the face of the component is positioned parallel to the TAL and psoas groove the patient specific version should be restored. We still use the TAL for controlling version in the dysplastic hip because we believe that the TAL and labrum compensate for any underlying bony abnormality.

The TAL should not be used as an aid to inclination. Worldwide, > 75% of surgeons operate with the patient in the lateral decubitus position and we have shown that errors in post-operative radiographic inclination (RI) of > 50° are generally caused by errors in patient positioning. Consequently, great care needs to be taken when positioning the patient. We also recommend 35° of apparent operative inclination (AOI) during surgery, as opposed to the traditional 45°.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):37–43.