Aims. Patients may present with concurrent symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine, with surgical treatment being indicated for both. Whether arthroplasty of the hip or spinal surgery should be performed first remains uncertain. Materials and Methods. Clinical scenarios were devised for a survey asking the preferred order of surgery and the rationale for this decision for five fictional patients with both OA of the hip and degenerative lumbar disorders. These were symptomatic OA of the hip and: 1) lumbar spinal stenosis with neurological claudication; 2) lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with leg pain; 3) lumbar disc herniation with leg weakness; 4) lumbar scoliosis with back pain; and 5) thoracolumbar disc herniation with myelopathy. This survey was sent to 110 members of The Hip Society and 101 members of the Scoliosis Research Society. The choices of the surgeons were compared among scenarios and between surgical specialties using the chi-squared test. The free-text comments were analyzed using text-mining. Results. Responses were received from 51 hip surgeons (46%) and 37 spine surgeons (37%). The percentages of hip surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ differed significantly among scenarios: 59% for scenario 1; 73% for scenario 2; 47% for scenario 3; 47% for scenario 4; and 10% for scenario 5 (p < 0.001). The percentages of spine surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ were 49% for scenario 1; 70% for scenario 2; 19% for scenario 3; 78% for scenario 4; and 0% for scenario 5. There were significant differences between the groups for scenarios 3 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘hip first’; p = 0.012) and 4 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘spine first’; p = 0.006). Conclusion. In patients with coexistent OA of the hip and degenerative disorders of the spine, the question of ‘hip or spinal surgery first’ elicits relatively consistent answers in some clinical scenarios, but remains controversial in others, even for experienced surgeons. The nature of neurological symptoms can influence surgeons’ decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):37–44

Aims. While previously underappreciated, factors related to the spine contribute substantially to the risk of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). These factors must be taken into consideration during preoperative planning for revision THA due to recurrent instability. We developed a protocol to assess the functional position of the spine, the significance of these findings, and how to address different pathologies at the time of revision THA. Patients and Methods. Prospectively collected data on 111 patients undergoing revision THA for recurrent instability from January 2014 to January 2017 at two institutions were included (protocol group) and matched 1:1 to 111 revisions specifically performed for instability not using this protocol (control group). Mean follow-up was 2.8 years. Protocol patients underwent standardized preoperative imaging including supine and standing anteroposterior (AP) pelvis and lateral radiographs. Each case was scored according to the Hip-Spine Classification in Revision THA. Results. Survival free of dislocation at two years was 97% in the protocol group (three dislocations, all within three months of surgery) versus 84% in the control group (18 patients). Furthermore, 77% of the inappropriately positioned acetabular components would have been unrecognized by supine AP pelvis imaging alone. Conclusion. Using the Hip-Spine Classification System in revision THA, we demonstrated a significant decrease in the risk of recurrent instability compared with a control group. Without the use of this algorithm, 77% of inappropriately positioned acetabular components would have been unrecognized and incorrect treatment may have been instituted. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:817–823

Aims. Some patients presenting with hip pain and instability and underlying acetabular dysplasia (AD) do not experience resolution of symptoms after surgical management. Hip-spine syndrome is a possible underlying cause. We hypothesized that there is a higher frequency of radiological spine anomalies in patients with AD. We also assessed the relationship between radiological severity of AD and frequency of spine anomalies. Methods. In a retrospective analysis of registry data, 122 hips in 122 patients who presented with hip pain and and a final diagnosis of AD were studied. Two observers analyzed hip and spine variables using standard radiographs to assess AD. The frequency of lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV), along with associated Castellvi grade, pars interarticularis defect, and spinal morphological measurements were recorded and correlated with radiological severity of AD. Results. Out of 122 patients, 110 (90.2%) were female and 12 (9.8%) were male. We analyzed the radiographs of 122 hips (59 (48.4%) symptomatic left hips, and 63 (51.6%) symptomatic right hips). Average age at time of presentation was 34.2 years (SD 11.2). Frequency of LSTV was high (39% to 43%), compared to historic records from the general population, with Castellvi type 3b being the most common (60% to 63%). Patients with AD have increased L4 and L5 interpedicular distance compared to published values. Frequency of pars interarticularis defect was 4%. Intraclass correlation coefficient for hip and spine variables assessed ranged from good (0.60 to 0.75) to excellent (0.75 to 1.00). Severity of AD did not demonstrate significant correlation with frequency of radiological spine anomalies. Conclusion. Patients with AD have increased frequency of spinal anomalies seen on standard hip radiographs. However, there exists no correlation between radiological severity of AD and frequency of spine anomalies. In managing AD patients, clinicians should also assess spinal anomalies that are easily found on standard hip radiographs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(8):1351–1357

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

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

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

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

Aims. Pelvic incidence (PI) is a position-independent spinopelvic parameter traditionally used by spinal surgeons to determine spinal alignment. Its relevance to the arthroplasty surgeon in assessing patient risk for total hip arthroplasty (THA) instability preoperatively is unclear. This study was undertaken to investigate the significance of PI relative to other spinopelvic parameter risk factors for instability to help guide its clinical application. Methods. Retrospective analysis was performed of a multicentre THA database of 9,414 patients with preoperative imaging (dynamic spinopelvic radiographs and pelvic CT scans). Several spinopelvic parameter measurements were made by engineers using advanced software including sacral slope (SS), standing anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPT), spinopelvic tilt (SPT), lumbar lordosis (LL), and PI. Lumbar flexion (LF) was determined by change in LL between standing and flexed-seated lateral radiographs. Abnormal pelvic mobility was defined as ∆SPT ≥ 20° between standing and flexed-forward positions. Sagittal spinal deformity (SSD) was defined as PI-LL mismatch > 10°. Results. PI showed a positive correlation with parameters of SS, SPT, and LL (r-value range 0.468 to 0.661). Patients with a higher PI value showed higher degrees of standing LL, likely as a compensatory measure to maintain sagittal spine balance. There was a positive correlation between LL and LF such that patients with less standing LL had decreased LF (r = 0.49). Similarly, there was a positive correlation between increased SSD and decreased LF (r = 0.54). PI in isolation did not show any significant correlation with lumbar (r = 0.04) or pelvic mobility (r = 0.02). The majority of patients (range 89.4% to 94.2%) had normal lumbar and pelvic mobility regardless of the PI value. Conclusion. The PI value alone is not indicative of either spinal or pelvic mobility, and thus in isolation may not be a risk factor for THA instability. Patients with SSD had higher rates of spinopelvic stiffness, which may be the mechanism by which PI relates to THA instability risk, but further clinical studies are required. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(3):352–358

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

Aims. Pelvic incidence (PI) is considered an important anatomical parameter for determining the sagittal balance of the spine. The contribution of an abnormal PI to hip osteoarthritis (OA) remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between PI and hip OA, and the difference in PI between hip OA without anatomical abnormalities (primary OA) and hip OA with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH-OA). Methods. In this study, 100 patients each of primary OA, DDH-OA, and control subjects with no history of hip disease were included. CT images were used to measure PI, sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion. PI was also subdivided into three categories: high PI (larger than 64.0°), medium PI (42.0° to 64.0°), and low PI (less than 42.0°). The anterior centre edge angles, posterior centre edge angles, and total sagittal femoral head coverage were measured. The correlations between PI and sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion were examined. Results. No significant difference in PI was observed between the three groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the category distribution of PI. The DDH-OA group had lower mean sagittal femoral head coverage than the other groups. There were no significant correlations between PI and other anatomical factors, including sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion. Conclusion. No associations were found between mean PI values or PI categories and hip OA. Furthermore, there was no difference in PI between patients with primary OA and DDH-OA. From our evaluation, we found no evidence of PI being an independent factor associated with the development of hip OA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1656–1661

Aims. Patients with spinal pathology who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) have an increased risk of dislocation and revision. The aim of this study was to determine if the use of the Hip-Spine Classification system in these patients would result in a decreased rate of postoperative dislocation in patients with spinal pathology. Methods. This prospective, multicentre study evaluated 3,777 consecutive patients undergoing THA by three surgeons, between January 2014 and December 2019. They were categorized using The Hip-Spine Classification system: group 1 with normal spinal alignment; group 2 with a flatback deformity, group 2A with normal spinal mobility, and group 2B with a stiff spine. Flatback deformity was defined by a pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis of > 10°, and spinal stiffness was defined by < 10° change in sacral slope from standing to seated. Each category determined a patient-specific component positioning. Survivorship free of dislocation was recorded and spinopelvic measurements were compared for reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient. Results. A total of 2,081 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 987 group 1A, 232 group 1B, 715 group 2A, and 147 group 2B patients. A total of 70 patients had a lumbar fusion, most had L4-5 (16; 23%) or L4-S1 (12; 17%) fusions; 51 patients (73%) had one or two levels fused, and 19 (27%) had > three levels fused. Dual mobility (DM) components were used in 166 patients (8%), including all of those in group 2B and with > three level fusions. Survivorship free of dislocation at five years was 99.2% with a 0.8% dislocation rate. The correlation coefficient was 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 0.91). Conclusion. This is the largest series in the literature evaluating the relationship between hip-spine pathology and dislocation after THA, and guiding appropriate treatment. The Hip-Spine Classification system allows surgeons to make appropriate evaluations preoperatively, and it guides the use of DM components in patients with spinopelvic pathology in order to reduce the risk of dislocation in these high-risk patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):17–24

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

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

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

Aims. Morphological abnormalities are present in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). We studied and compared the pelvic anatomy and morphology between the affected hemipelvis with the unaffected side in patients with unilateral Crowe type IV DDH using 3D imaging and analysis. Methods. A total of 20 patients with unilateral Crowe-IV DDH were included in the study. The contralateral side was considered normal in all patients. A coordinate system based on the sacral base (SB) in a reconstructed pelvic model was established. The pelvic orientations (tilt, rotation, and obliquity) of the affected side were assessed by establishing a virtual anterior pelvic plane (APP). The bilateral coordinates of the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and the centres of hip rotation were established, and parameters concerning size and volume were compared for both sides of the pelvis. Results. The ASIS on the dislocated side was located inferiorly and anteriorly compared to the healthy side (coordinates on the y-axis and z-axis; p = 0.001; p = 0.031). The centre of hip rotation on the dislocated side was located inferiorly and medially compared to the healthy side (coordinates on the x-axis and the y-axis; p < 0.001; p = 0.003). The affected hemipelvis tilted anteriorly in the sagittal plane (mean 8.05° (SD 3.57°)), anteriorly rotated in the transverse plane (mean 3.31° (SD 1.41°)), and tilted obliquely and caudally in the coronal plane (mean 2.04° (SD 0.81°)) relative to the healthy hemipelvis. The affected hemipelvis was significantly smaller in the length, width, height, and volume than the healthy counterpart. (p = 0.014; p = 0.009; p = 0.035; p = 0.002). Conclusion. Asymmetric abnormalities were identified on the affected hemipelvis in patients with the unilateral Crowe-IV DDH using 3D imaging techniques. Improved understanding of the morphological changes may influence the positioning of the acetabular component at THA. Acetabular component malpositioning errors caused by anterior tilt of the affected hemi pelvis and the abnormal position of the affected side centre of rotation should be considered by orthopaedic surgeons when undertaking THA in patients with Crowe-IV DDH. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(10):1311–1318

Aims

It has been well documented in the arthroplasty literature that lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) contributes to abnormal spinopelvic motion. However, the relationship between the severity or pattern of hip osteoarthritis (OA) as measured on an anteroposterior (AP) pelvic view and spinopelvic biomechanics has not been well investigated. Therefore, the aim of the study is to examine the association between the severity and pattern of hip OA and spinopelvic motion.

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).

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.

Aims

Spinopelvic pathology increases the risk for instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA), yet few studies have evaluated how pathology varies with age or sex. The aims of this study were: 1) to report differences in spinopelvic parameters with advancing age and between the sexes; and 2) to determine variation in the prevalence of THA instability risk factors with advancing age.

Aims

Hip arthroscopy has gained prominence as a primary surgical intervention for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). This study aimed to identify radiological features, and their combinations, that predict the outcome of hip arthroscopy for FAI.