Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 83
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1025 - 1031
1 Sep 2022
Thummala AR Xi Y Middleton E Kohli A Chhabra A Wells J

Aims. Pelvic tilt is believed to affect the symptomology of osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip by alterations in joint movement, dysplasia of the hip by modification of acetabular cover, and femoroacetabular impingement by influencing the impingement-free range of motion. While the apparent role of pelvic tilt in hip pathology has been reported, the exact effects of many forms of treatment on pelvic tilt are unknown. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effects of surgery on pelvic tilt in these three groups of patients. Methods. The demographic, radiological, and outcome data for all patients operated on by the senior author between October 2016 and January 2020 were identified from a prospective registry, and all those who underwent surgery with a primary diagnosis of OA, dysplasia, or femoroacetabular impingement were considered for inclusion. Pelvic tilt was assessed on anteroposterior (AP) standing radiographs using the pre- and postoperative pubic symphysis to sacroiliac joint (PS-SI) distance, and the outcomes were assessed with the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and Harris Hip Score (HHS). Results. The linear regression model revealed a significant negative predictive association between the standing pre- and postoperative PS-SI distances for all three groups of patients (all p < 0.001). There was a significant improvement in all three outcome measures between the pre- and postoperative values (p < 0.05). Conclusion. There is a statistically significant decrease in pelvic tilt after surgery in patients with OA of the hip, dysplasia, and femoroacetabular impingement. These results confirm that surgery significantly alters the pelvic orientation. Pelvic tilt significantly decreased after total hip arthroplasty, periacetabular osteotomy, and arthroscopy/surgical hip dislocation. The impact of surgery on pelvic tilt should be considered within the therapeutic plan in order to optimize pelvic orientation in these patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(9):1025–1031


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 1 | Pages 19 - 27
1 Jan 2024
Tang H Guo S Ma Z Wang S Zhou Y

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a patient-specific algorithm which we developed for predicting changes in sagittal pelvic tilt after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. This retrospective study included 143 patients who underwent 171 THAs between April 2019 and October 2020 and had full-body lateral radiographs preoperatively and at one year postoperatively. We measured the pelvic incidence (PI), the sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt, sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), and thoracic kyphosis to classify patients into types A, B1, B2, B3, and C. The change of pelvic tilt was predicted according to the normal range of SVA (0 mm to 50 mm) for types A, B1, B2, and B3, and based on the absolute value of one-third of the PI-LL mismatch for type C patients. The reliability of the classification of the patients and the prediction of the change of pelvic tilt were assessed using kappa values and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), respectively. Validity was assessed using the overall mean error and mean absolute error (MAE) for the prediction of the change of pelvic tilt. Results. The kappa values were 0.927 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.861 to 0.992) and 0.945 (95% CI 0.903 to 0.988) for the inter- and intraobserver reliabilities, respectively, and the ICCs ranged from 0.919 to 0.997. The overall mean error and MAE for the prediction of the change of pelvic tilt were -0.3° (SD 3.6°) and 2.8° (SD 2.4°), respectively. The overall absolute change of pelvic tilt was 5.0° (SD 4.1°). Pre- and postoperative values and changes in pelvic tilt, SVA, SS, and LL varied significantly among the five types of patient. Conclusion. We found that the proposed algorithm was reliable and valid for predicting the standing pelvic tilt after THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(1):19–27


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 2 | Pages 184 - 191
1 Feb 2017
Pierrepont J Hawdon G Miles BP Connor BO Baré J Walter LR Marel E Solomon M McMahon S Shimmin AJ

Aims. The pelvis rotates in the sagittal plane during daily activities. These rotations have a direct effect on the functional orientation of the acetabulum. The aim of this study was to quantify changes in pelvic tilt between different functional positions. Patients and Methods. Pre-operatively, pelvic tilt was measured in 1517 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) in three functional positions – supine, standing and flexed seated (the moment when patients initiate rising from a seated position). Supine pelvic tilt was measured from CT scans, standing and flexed seated pelvic tilts were measured from standardised lateral radiographs. Anterior pelvic tilt was assigned a positive value. Results. The mean pelvic tilt was 4.2° (-20.5° to 24.5°), -1.3° (-30.2° to 27.9°) and 0.6° (-42.0° to 41.3°) in the three positions, respectively. The mean sagittal pelvic rotation from supine to standing was -5.5° (-21.8° to 8.4°), from supine to flexed seated was -3.7° (-48.3° to 38.6°) and from standing to flexed seated was 1.8° (-51.8° to 39.5°). In 259 patients (17%), the extent of sagittal pelvic rotation could lead to functional malorientation of the acetabular component. Factoring in an intra-operative delivery error of ± 5° extends this risk to 51% of patients. Conclusion. Planning and measurement of the intended position of the acetabular component in the supine position may fail to predict clinically significant changes in its orientation during functional activities, as a consequence of individual pelvic kinematics. Optimal orientation is patient-specific and requires an evaluation of functional pelvic tilt pre-operatively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:184–91


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 7 | Pages 786 - 791
1 Jul 2022
Jenkinson MRJ Peeters W Hutt JRB Witt JD

Aims. Acetabular retroversion is a recognized cause of hip impingement and can be influenced by pelvic tilt (PT), which changes in different functional positions. Positional changes in PT have not previously been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion. Methods. Supine and standing anteroposterior (AP) pelvic radiographs were retrospectively analyzed in 69 patients 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 the angle of PT was measured both by the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle and the pubic symphysis to sacroiliac (PS-SI) index. Results. In the supine position, the mean PT (by SFP) was 1.05° (SD 3.77°), which changed on standing to a PT of 8.64° (SD 5.34°). A significant increase in posterior PT from supine to standing of 7.59° (SD 4.5°; SFP angle) and 5.89° (SD 3.33°; PS-SI index) was calculated (p < 0.001). There was a good correlation in PT change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (0.901 in the preoperative group and 0.815 in the postoperative group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing radiographs compared to supine: crossover index (0.16 (SD 0.16) vs 0.38 (SD 0.15); p < 0.001), crossover sign (19/28 hips 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 hips vs 24/28 hips; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Posterior PT increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion. The features of acetabular retroversion were less evident on standing radiographs. The low PT angle in the supine position is a factor in the increased appearance of acetabular retroversion. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs to highlight signs of acetabular retroversion, and to assist with optimizing acetabular correction at the time of surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):786–791


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 8 | Pages 1345 - 1350
1 Aug 2021
Czubak-Wrzosek M Nitek Z Sztwiertnia P Czubak J Grzelecki D Kowalczewski J Tyrakowski M

Aims. The aim of the study was to compare two methods of calculating pelvic incidence (PI) and pelvic tilt (PT), either by using the femoral heads or acetabular domes to determine the bicoxofemoral axis, in patients with unilateral or bilateral primary hip osteoarthritis (OA). Methods. PI and PT were measured on standing lateral radiographs of the spine in two groups: 50 patients with unilateral (Group I) and 50 patients with bilateral hip OA (Group II), using the femoral heads or acetabular domes to define the bicoxofemoral axis. Agreement between the methods was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the standard error of measurement (SEm). The intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of the two methods were analyzed on 31 radiographs in both groups to calculate ICC and SEm. Results. In both groups, excellent agreement between the two methods was obtained, with ICC of 0.99 and SEm 0.3° for Group I, and ICC 0.99 and SEm 0.4° for Group II. The intraobserver reproducibility was excellent for both methods in both groups, with an ICC of at least 0.97 and SEm not exceeding 0.8°. The study also revealed excellent interobserver reliability for both methods in both groups, with ICC 0.99 and SEm 0.5° or less. Conclusion. Either the femoral heads or acetabular domes can be used to define the bicoxofemoral axis on the lateral standing radiographs of the spine for measuring PI and PT in patients with idiopathic unilateral or bilateral hip OA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(8):1345–1350


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1505 - 1510
2 Nov 2020
Klemt C Limmahakhun S Bounajem G Xiong L Yeo I Kwon Y

Aims. The complex relationship between acetabular component position and spinopelvic mobility in patients following total hip arthroplasty (THA) renders it difficult to optimize acetabular component positioning. Mobility of the normal lumbar spine during postural changes results in alterations in pelvic tilt (PT) to maintain the sagittal balance in each posture and, as a consequence, markedly changes the functional component anteversion (FCA). This study aimed to investigate the in vivo association of lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) with the PT angle and with FCA during postural changes in THA patients. Methods. A total of 50 patients with unilateral THA underwent CT imaging for radiological evaluation of presence and severity of lumbar DDD. In all, 18 patients with lumbar DDD were compared to 32 patients without lumbar DDD. In vivo PT and FCA, and the magnitudes of changes (ΔPT; ΔFCA) during supine, standing, swing-phase, and stance-phase positions were measured using a validated dual fluoroscopic imaging system. Results. PT, FCA, ΔPT, and ΔFCA were significantly correlated with the severity of lumbar DDD. Patients with severe lumbar DDD showed marked differences in PT with changes in posture; there was an anterior tilt (-16.6° vs -12.3°, p = 0.047) in the supine position, but a posterior tilt in an upright posture (1.0° vs -3.6°, p = 0.005). A significant decrease in ΔFCA during stand-to-swing (8.6° vs 12.8°, p = 0.038) and stand-to-stance (7.3° vs 10.6°,p = 0.042) was observed in the severe lumbar DDD group. Conclusion. There were marked differences in the relationship between PT and posture in patients with severe lumbar DDD compared with healthy controls. Clinical decision-making should consider the relationship between PT and FCA in order to reduce the risk of impingement at large ranges of motion in THA patients with lumbar DDD. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1505–1510


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 2 | Pages 128 - 135
1 Feb 2024
Jenkinson MRJ Cheung TCC Witt J Hutt JRB

Aims. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether acetabular retroversion (AR) represents a structural anatomical abnormality of the pelvis or is a functional phenomenon of pelvic positioning in the sagittal plane, and to what extent the changes that result from patient-specific functional position affect the extent of AR. Methods. A comparative radiological study of 19 patients (38 hips) with AR were compared with a control group of 30 asymptomatic patients (60 hips). CT scans were corrected for rotation in the axial and coronal planes, and the sagittal plane was then aligned to the anterior pelvic plane. External rotation of the hemipelvis was assessed using the superior iliac wing and inferior iliac wing angles as well as quadrilateral plate angles, and correlated with cranial and central acetabular version. Sagittal anatomical parameters were also measured and correlated to version measurements. In 12 AR patients (24 hips), the axial measurements were repeated after matching sagittal pelvic rotation with standing and supine anteroposterior radiographs. Results. Acetabular version was significantly lower and measurements of external rotation of the hemipelvis were significantly increased in the AR group compared to the control group. The AR group also had increased evidence of anterior projection of the iliac wing in the sagittal plane. The acetabular orientation angles were more retroverted in the supine compared to standing position, and the change in acetabular version correlated with the change in sagittal pelvic tilt. An anterior pelvic tilt of 1° correlated with 1.02° of increased cranial retroversion and 0.76° of increased central retroversion. Conclusion. This study has demonstrated that patients with symptomatic AR have both an externally rotated hemipelvis and increased anterior projection of the iliac wing compared to a control group of asymptomatic patients. Functional sagittal pelvic positioning was also found to affect AR in symptomatic patients: the acetabulum was more retroverted in the supine position compared to standing position. Changes in acetabular version correlate with the change in sagittal pelvic tilt. These findings should be taken into account by surgeons when planning acetabular correction for AR with periacetabular osteotomy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):128–135


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 7 Supple B | Pages 41 - 46
1 Jul 2020
Ransone M Fehring K Fehring T

Aims. Patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility are at increased risk for instability. Measuring the change in sacral slope (ΔSS) can help determine spinopelvic mobility preoperatively. Sacral slope (SS) should decrease at least 10° to demonstrate adequate posterior pelvic tilt. There is potential for different ΔSS measurements in the same patient based on sitting posture. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of sitting posture on the ΔSS in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. In total, 51 patients undergoing THA were reviewed to quantify the variability in preoperative spinopelvic mobility when measuring two different sitting positions using SS for planning. Results. A total of 32 patients had standardized relaxed sitting radiographs, while 35 patients had standardized flexed sitting images. Of the 32 patients with relaxed sitting views, the mean ΔSS was 20.7° (SD 8.9°). No patients exhibited an increase in SS during relaxed sitting (i.e. anterior pelvic tilt or so-called reverse accommodation). Of the 35 patients with flexed sitting radiographs, the mean ΔSS was only 2.1° (SD 9.7°) with 16/35 (45.71%) showing anterior pelvic tilt, or so-called reverse accommodation, unexpectedly increasing the sitting SS compared to the standing SS. Overall, 18 patients had both relaxed sitting and flexed sitting radiographs. In patients with both types of sitting radiographs, the mean relaxed sit to stand ΔSS was 18.06° (SD 6.07°), while only a 3.00° (SD 10.53°) ΔSS was noted when flexed sitting. There was a mean ΔSS difference of 15.06° (SD 7.67°) noted in the same patient cohort depending on sitting posture (p < 0.001). Conclusion. A 15° mean difference was noted depending on the sitting posture of the patient. Since decisions on component position can be made on preoperative lateral sit-stand radiographs, postural standardization is crucial. If using ΔSS for preoperative planning, the relaxed sitting radiograph is preferred. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):41–46


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 7 | Pages 845 - 852
1 Jul 2018
Langston J Pierrepont J Gu Y Shimmin A

Aims. It is important to consider sagittal pelvic rotation when introducing the acetabular component at total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to identify patients who are at risk of unfavourable pelvic mobility, which could result in poor outcomes after THA. Patients and Methods. A consecutive series of 4042 patients undergoing THA had lateral functional radiographs and a low-dose CT scan to measure supine pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, standing pelvic tilt, flexed-seated pelvic tilt, standing lumbar lordotic angle, flexed-seated lumbar lordotic angle, and lumbar flexion. Changes in pelvic tilt from supine-to-standing positions and supine-to-flexed-seated positions were determined. A change in pelvic tilt of 13° between positions was deemed unfavourable as it alters functional anteversion by 10° and effectively places the acetabular component outside the safe zone of orientation. Results. For both men and women, the degree of lumbar flexion was a significant predictor of risk in hip flexion (p < 0.0001) with increased odds of unfavourable pelvic mobility in those with lumbar flexion of < 20° (men, odds ratio (OR) 6.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.83 to 11.89; women, OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.87 to 4.71). In women, age and standing pelvic tilt were significant predictors of risk in hip extension (p = 0.0082 and p < 0.0001, respectively). The risk of unfavourable pelvic mobility was higher in those aged > 75 years (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.32) and those with standing pelvic tilt of < -10° for extension risk (OR 7.10, 95% CI 4.10 to 10.29). In men, only standing pelvic tilt was significant (p < 0.0001) for hip extension with an increased risk of unfavourable pelvic mobility (OR 8.68, 95% CI 5.19 to 14.51). Conclusion. Patients found to have unfavourable pelvic mobility had limited lumbar flexion and more posterior standing pelvic tilt in both men and women, as well as increasing age in women. We recommend that patients undergo preoperative functional radiographic screening to determine specific parameters that can affect the functional orientation of the acetabular component. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:845–52


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 7 Supple B | Pages 59 - 65
1 Jul 2021
Bracey DN Hegde V Shimmin AJ Jennings JM Pierrepont JW Dennis DA

Aims. Cross-table lateral (CTL) radiographs are commonly used to measure acetabular component anteversion after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The CTL measurements may differ by > 10° from CT scan measurements but the reasons for this discrepancy are poorly understood. Anteversion measurements from CTL radiographs and CT scans are compared to identify spinopelvic parameters predictive of inaccuracy. Methods. THA patients (n = 47; 27 males, 20 females; mean age 62.9 years (SD 6.95)) with preoperative spinopelvic mobility, radiological analysis, and postoperative CT scans were retrospectively reviewed. Acetabular component anteversion was measured on postoperative CTL radiographs and CT scans using 3D reconstructions of the pelvis. Two cohorts were identified based on a CTL-CT error of ≥ 10° (n = 11) or < 10° (n = 36). Spinopelvic mobility parameters were compared using independent-samples t-tests. Correlation between error and mobility parameters were assessed with Pearson’s coefficient. Results. Patients with CTL error > 10° (10° to 14°) had stiffer lumbar spines with less mean lumbar flexion (38.9°(SD 11.6°) vs 47.4° (SD 13.1°); p = 0.030), different sagittal balance measured by pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (5.9° (SD 18.8°) vs -1.7° (SD 9.8°); p = 0.042), more pelvic extension when seated (pelvic tilt -9.7° (SD 14.1°) vs -2.2° (SD 13.2°); p = 0.050), and greater change in pelvic tilt between supine and seated positions (12.6° (SD 12.1°) vs 4.7° (SD 12.5°); p = 0.036). The CTL measurement error showed a positive correlation with increased CTL anteversion (r = 0.5; p = 0.001), standing lordosis (r = 0.23; p = 0.050), seated lordosis (r = 0.4; p = 0.009), and pelvic tilt change between supine and step-up positions (r = 0.34; p = 0.010). Conclusion. Differences in spinopelvic mobility may explain the variability of acetabular anteversion measurements made on CTL radiographs. Patients with stiff spines and increased compensatory pelvic movement have less accurate measurements on CTL radiographs. Flexion of the contralateral hip is required to obtain clear CTL radiographs. In patients with lumbar stiffness, this movement may extend the pelvis and increase anteversion of the acetabulum on CTL views. Reliable analysis of acetabular component anteversion in this patient population may require advanced imaging with a CT scan. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):59–65


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 7 | Pages 820 - 825
1 Jul 2022
Dhawan R Baré JV Shimmin A

Aims. Adverse spinal motion or balance (spine mobility) and adverse pelvic mobility, in combination, are often referred to as adverse spinopelvic mobility (SPM). A stiff lumbar spine, large posterior standing pelvic tilt, and severe sagittal spinal deformity have been identified as risk factors for increased hip instability. Adverse SPM can create functional malposition of the acetabular components and hence is an instability risk. Adverse pelvic mobility is often, but not always, associated with abnormal spinal motion parameters. Dislocation rates for dual-mobility articulations (DMAs) have been reported to be between 0% and 1.1%. The aim of this study was to determine the early survivorship from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) of patients with adverse SPM who received a DMA. Methods. A multicentre study was performed using data from 227 patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), enrolled consecutively. All the patients who had one or more adverse spine or pelvic mobility parameter had a DMA inserted at the time of their surgery. The mean age was 76 years (22 to 93) and 63% were female (n = 145). At a mean of 14 months (5 to 31) postoperatively, the AOANJRR was analyzed for follow-up information. Reasons for revision and types of revision were identified. Results. The AOANJRR reported two revisions: one due to infection, and the second due to femoral component loosening. No revisions for dislocation were reported. One patient died with the prosthesis in situ. Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 99.1% (95% confidence interval 98.3 to 100) at 14 months (number at risk 104). Conclusion. In our cohort of patients undergoing primary THA with one or more factor associated with adverse SPM, DM bearings conferred stability at two years’ follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):820–825


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1662 - 1668
1 Nov 2021
Bhanushali A Chimutengwende-Gordon M Beck M Callary SA Costi K Howie DW Solomon LB

Aims. The aims of this study were to compare clinically relevant measurements of hip dysplasia on radiographs taken in the supine and standing position, and to compare Hip2Norm software and Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS)-derived digital radiological measurements. Methods. Preoperative supine and standing radiographs of 36 consecutive patients (43 hips) who underwent periacetabular osteotomy surgery were retrospectively analyzed from a single-centre, two-surgeon cohort. Anterior coverage (AC), posterior coverage (PC), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), acetabular inclination (AI), sharp angle (SA), pelvic tilt (PT), retroversion index (RI), femoroepiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index, femoroepiphyseal horizontal angle (FEHA), leg length discrepancy (LLD), and pelvic obliquity (PO) were analyzed using both Hip2Norm software and PACS-derived measurements where applicable. Results. Analysis of supine and standing radiographs resulted in significant variation for measurements of PT (p < 0.001) and AC (p = 0.005). The variation in PT correlated with the variation in AC in a limited number of patients (R. 2. = 0.378; p = 0.012). Conclusion. The significant variation in PT and AC between supine and standing radiographs suggests that it may benefit surgeons to have both radiographs when planning surgical correction of hip dysplasia. We also recommend using PACS-derived measurements of AI and SA due to the poor interobserver error on Hip2Norm. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1662–1668


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1275 - 1279
1 Oct 2018
Fader RR Tao MA Gaudiani MA Turk R Nwachukwu BU Esposito CI Ranawat AS

Aims. The purpose of this study was to evaluate spinopelvic mechanics from standing and sitting positions in subjects with and without femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). We hypothesize that FAI patients will experience less flexion at the lumbar spine and more flexion at the hip whilst changing from standing to sitting positions than subjects without FAI. This increase in hip flexion may contribute to symptomatology in FAI. Patients and Methods. Male subjects were prospectively enrolled to the study (n = 20). Mean age was 31 years old (22 to 41). All underwent clinical examination, plain radiographs, and dynamic imaging using EOS. Subjects were categorized into three groups: non-FAI (no radiographic or clinical FAI or pain), asymptomatic FAI (radiographic and clinical FAI but no pain), and symptomatic FAI (patients with both pain and radiographic FAI). FAI was defined as internal rotation less than 15° and alpha angle greater than 60°. Subjects underwent standing and sitting radiographs in order to measure spine and femoroacetabular flexion. Results. Compared with non-FAI controls, symptomatic patients with FAI had less flexion at the spine (mean 22°, . sd. 12°, vs mean 35°, . sd. 8°; p = 0.04) and more at the hip (mean 72°, . sd. 6°, vs mean 62°, . sd. 8°; p = 0.047). Subjects with asymptomatic FAI had more spine flexion and similar hip flexion when compared to symptomatic FAI patients. Both FAI groups also sat with more anterior pelvic tilt than control patients. There were no differences in standing alignment among groups. Conclusion. Symptomatic patients with FAI require more flexion at the hip to achieve sitting position due to their inability to compensate through the lumbar spine. With limited spine flexion, FAI patients sit with more anterior pelvic tilt, which may lead to impingement between the acetabulum and proximal femur. Differences in spinopelvic mechanics between FAI and non-FAI patients may contribute to the progression of FAI symptoms. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1275–9


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 8 | Pages 902 - 909
1 Aug 2019
Innmann MM Merle C Gotterbarm T Ewerbeck V Beaulé PE Grammatopoulos G

Aims. This study of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip aimed to: 1) characterize the contribution of the hip, spinopelvic complex, and lumbar spine when moving from the standing to the sitting position; 2) assess whether abnormal spinopelvic mobility is associated with worse symptoms; and 3) identify whether spinopelvic mobility can be predicted from static anatomical radiological parameters. Patients and Methods. A total of 122 patients with end-stage OA of the hip awaiting total hip arthroplasty (THA) were prospectively studied. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; Oxford Hip Score, Oswestry Disability Index, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Score) and clinical data were collected. Sagittal spinopelvic mobility was calculated as the change from the standing to sitting position using the lumbar lordosis angle (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic-femoral angle (PFA), and acetabular anteinclination (AI) from lateral radiographs. The interaction of the different parameters was assessed. PROMs were compared between patients with normal spinopelvic mobility (10° ≤ ∆PT ≤ 30°) or abnormal spinopelvic mobility (stiff: ∆PT < ± 10°; hypermobile: ∆PT > ± 30°). Multiple regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were used to test for possible predictors of spinopelvic mobility. Results. Standing to sitting, the hip flexed by a mean of 57° (. sd. 17°), the pelvis tilted backwards by a mean of 20° (. sd. 12°), and the lumbar spine flexed by a mean of 20° (. sd. 14°); strong correlations were detected. There was no difference in PROMs between patients in the different spinopelvic mobility groups. Maximum hip flexion, standing PT, and standing AI were independent predictors of spinopelvic mobility (R. 2. = 0.42). The combined thresholds for standing was PT ≥ 13° and hip flexion ≥ 88° in the clinical examination, and had 90% sensitivity and 63% specificity of predicting spinopelvic stiffness, while SS ≥ 42° had 84% sensitivity and 67% specificity of predicting spinopelvic hypermobility. Conclusion. The hip, on average, accounts for three-quarters of the standing-to-sitting movement, but there is great variation. Abnormal spinopelvic mobility cannot be screened with PROMs. However, clinical and standing radiological features can predict spinopelvic mobility with good enough accuracy, allowing them to be used as reliable screening tools. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:902–909


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 2 | Pages 198 - 206
1 Feb 2019
Salib CG Reina N Perry KI Taunton MJ Berry DJ Abdel MP

Aims. Concurrent hip and spine pathologies can alter the biomechanics of spinopelvic mobility in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study examines how differences in pelvic orientation of patients with spine fusions can increase the risk of dislocation risk after THA. Patients and Methods. We identified 84 patients (97 THAs) between 1998 and 2015 who had undergone spinal fusion prior to primary THA. Patients were stratified into three groups depending on the length of lumbar fusion and whether or not the sacrum was involved. Mean age was 71 years (40 to 87) and 54 patients (56%) were female. The mean body mass index (BMI) was 30 kg/m. 2. (19 to 45). Mean follow-up was six years (2 to 17). Patients were 1:2 matched to patients with primary THAs without spine fusion. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated. Results. Dislocation in the fusion group was 5.2% at one year versus 1.7% in controls but this did not reach statistical significance (HR 1.9; p = 0.33). Compared with controls, there was no significant difference in rate of dislocation in patients without a sacral fusion. When the sacrum was involved, the rate of dislocation was significantly higher than in controls (HR 4.5; p = 0.03), with a trend to more dislocations in longer lumbosacral fusions. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics of THA (i.e. surgical approach and femoral head diameter) did not significantly impact risk of dislocation (p > 0.05). Significant radiological differences were measured in mean anterior pelvic tilt between the one-level lumbar fusion group (22°), the multiple-level fusion group (27°), and the sacral fusion group (32°; p < 0.01). Ten-year survival was 93% in the fusion group and 95% in controls (HR 1.2; p = 0.8). Conclusion. Lumbosacral spinal fusions prior to THA increase the risk of dislocation within the first six months. Fusions involving the sacrum with multiple levels of lumbar involvement notably increased the risk of postoperative dislocation compared with a control group and other lumbar fusions. Surgeons should take care with component positioning and may consider higher stability implants in this high-risk cohort


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1289 - 1296
1 Oct 2018
Berliner JL Esposito CI Miller TT Padgett DE Mayman DJ Jerabek SA

Aims. The aims of this study were to measure sagittal standing and sitting lumbar-pelvic-femoral alignment in patients before and following total hip arthroplasty (THA), and to consider what preoperative factors may influence a change in postoperative pelvic position. Patients and Methods. A total of 161 patients were considered for inclusion. Patients had a mean age of the remaining 61 years (. sd. 11) with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 28 kg/m. 2. (. sd. 6). Of the 161 patients, 82 were male (51%). We excluded 17 patients (11%) with spinal conditions known to affect lumbar mobility as well as the rotational axis of the spine. Standing and sitting spine-to-lower-limb radiographs were taken of the remaining 144 patients before and one year following THA. Spinopelvic alignment measurements, including sacral slope, lumbar lordosis, and pelvic incidence, were measured. These angles were used to calculate lumbar spine flexion and femoroacetabular hip flexion from a standing to sitting position. A radiographic scoring system was used to identify those patients in the series who had lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) and compare spinopelvic parameters between those patients with DDD (n = 38) and those who did not (n = 106). Results. Following THA, patients sat with more anterior pelvic tilt (mean increased sacral slope 18° preoperatively versus 23° postoperatively; p = 0.001) and more lumbar lordosis (mean 28° preoperatively versus 35° postoperatively; p = 0.001). Preoperative change in sacral slope from standing to sitting (p = 0.03) and the absence of DDD (p = 0.001) correlated to an increased change in postoperative sitting pelvic alignment. Conclusion. Sitting lumbar-pelvic-femoral alignment following THA may be driven by hip arthritis and/or spinal deformity. Patients with DDD and fixed spinopelvic alignment have a predictable pelvic position one year following THA. Patients with normal spines have less predictable postoperative pelvic position, which is likely to be driven by hip stiffness. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1289–96


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1280 - 1288
1 Oct 2018
Grammatopoulos G Gofton W Cochran M Dobransky J Carli A Abdelbary H Gill HS Beaulé PE

Aims. This study aims to: determine the difference in pelvic position that occurs between surgery and radiographic, supine, postoperative assessment; examine how the difference in pelvic position influences subsequent component orientation; and establish whether differences in pelvic position, and thereafter component orientation, exist between total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed in the supine versus the lateral decubitus positions. Patients and Methods. The intra- and postoperative anteroposterior pelvic radiographs of 321 THAs were included; 167 were performed with the patient supine using the anterior approach and 154 were performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus using the posterior approach. The inclination and anteversion of the acetabular component was measured and the difference (Δ) between the intra- and postoperative radiographs was determined. The target zone was inclination/anteversion of 40°/20° (± 10°). Changes in the tilt, rotation, and obliquity of the pelvis on the intra- and postoperative radiographs were calculated from Δinclination/anteversion using the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm. Results. The mean postoperative inclination/anteversion was 40° (± 8°)/23° (± 9°) with Δinclination and/or Δanteversion > ± 10° in 74 (21%). Intraoperatively, the pelvis was anteriorly tilted by a mean of 4° (± 10°), internally rotated by a mean of 1° (± 10°) and adducted by a mean of 1° (± 5°). Having Δinclination and/or Δanteversion > ± 10° was associated with a 3.5 odds ratio of having the acetabular component outside the target zone. A greater proportion of THAs that were undertaken with the patient in the lateral decubitus position had Δinclination and/or Δanteversion > ± 10° (35.3%, 54/153) compared with those in the supine position (4.8%, 8/167; p < 0.001). A greater number of acetabular components were within the target zone in THAs undertaken with the patient in the supine position (72%, 120/167), compared with those in the lateral decubitus position (44%, 67/153; p < 0.001). Intraoperatively, the pelvis was more anteriorly tilted (p < 0.001) and more internally rotated (p = 0.04) when the patient was in the lateral decubitus position. Conclusion. The pelvic position is more reliable when the patient is in the supine position, leading to more consistent orientation of the acetabular component. Significant differences in pelvic tilt and rotation are seen with the patient in the lateral decubitus position. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1280–8


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 4_Supple_B | Pages 41 - 48
1 Apr 2017
Fernquest S Arnold C Palmer A Broomfield J Denton J Taylor A Glyn-Jones S

Aims. The aim of this study was to examine the real time in vivo kinematics of the hip in patients with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Patients and Methods. A total of 50 patients (83 hips) underwent 4D dynamic CT scanning of the hip, producing real time osseous models of the pelvis and femur being moved through flexion, adduction, and internal rotation. The location and size of the cam deformity and its relationship to the angle of flexion of the hip and pelvic tilt, and the position of impingement were recorded. Results. In these patients with cam-type FAI, there was significant correlation between the alpha angle and flexion to the point of impingement (mean 41.36°; 14.32° to 57.95°) (R = -0.5815 and p = < 0.001). Patients with a large cam deformity (alpha angle > 78°) had significantly less flexion to the point of impingement (mean 36.30°; 14.32° to 55.18°) than patients with a small cam deformity (alpha angle 60° to 78°) (mean 45.34°; 27.25° to 57.95°) (p = < 0.001). Conclusion. This study has shown that cam-type impingement can occur early in flexion (40°), particularly in patients with large anterior deformities. These patients risk chondrolabral damage during routine activities such as walking, and going up stairs. These findings offer important insights into the cause of the symptoms, the mechanisms of screening and the forms of treatment available for these patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(4 Supple B):41–8


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1140 - 1146
1 Sep 2017
Shoji T Yamasaki T Izumi S Murakami H Mifuji K Sawa M Yasunaga Y Adachi N Ochi M

Aims. Our aim was to evaluate the radiographic characteristics of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) for the potential of posterior bony impingement using CT simulations. Patients and Methods. Virtual CT data from 112 patients who underwent THA were analysed. There were 40 men and 72 women. Their mean age was 59.1 years (41 to 76). Associations between radiographic characteristics and posterior bony impingement and the range of external rotation of the hip were evaluated. In addition, we investigated the effects of pelvic tilt and the neck/shaft angle and femoral offset on posterior bony impingement. Results. The range of external rotation and the ischiofemoral length were significantly lower, while femoral anteversion, the ischial ratio, and ischial angle were significantly higher in patients with posterior bony impingement compared with those who had implant impingement (p <  0.05). The range of external rotation positively correlated with ischiofemoral length (r = 0.49, p < 0.05), and negatively correlated with ischial length (r = -0.49, p < 0.05), ischial ratio (r =- 0.49, p < 0.05) and ischial angle (r = -0.55, p < 0.05). The range of external rotation was lower in patients with posterior pelvic tilt (p < 0.05) and in those with a high offset femoral component (p < 0.05) due to posterior bony impingement. Conclusion. Posterior bony impingement after THA is more likely in patients with a wider ischium and a narrow ischiofemoral space. A high femoral offset and posterior pelvic tilt are also risk factors for this type of impingement. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1140–6


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 7 | Pages 910 - 916
1 Jul 2016
Pierrepont JW Feyen H Miles BP Young DA Baré JV Shimmin AJ

Aims. Long-term clinical outcomes for ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings are encouraging. However, there is a risk of squeaking. Guidelines for the orientation of the acetabular component are defined from static imaging, but the position of the pelvis and thus the acetabular component during activities associated with edge-loading are likely to be very different from those measured when the patient is supine. We assessed the functional orientation of the acetabular component. Patients and Methods. A total of 18 patients with reproducible squeaking in their CoC hips during deep flexion were investigated with a control group of 36 non-squeaking CoC hips. The two groups were matched for the type of implant, the orientation of the acetabular component when supine, the size of the femoral head, ligament laxity, maximum hip flexion and body mass index. . Results. The mean functional anteversion of the acetabular component at the point when patients initiated rising from a seated position was significantly less in the squeaking group than in the control group, 8.1° (-10.5° to 36.0°) and 21.1° (-1.9° to 38.4°) respectively (p = 0.002). . Conclusion. The functional orientation of the acetabular component during activities associated with posterior edge-loading are different from those measured when supine due to patient-specific pelvic kinematics. Individuals with a large anterior pelvic tilt during deep flexion might be more susceptible to posterior edge-loading and squeaking as a consequence of a significant decrease in the functional anteversion of the acetabular component. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:910–16