Aims. This study aimed to evaluate sagittal spinopelvic alignment (SSPA) in the early stage of rapidly destructive coxopathy (RDC) compared with hip osteoarthritis (HOA), and to identify risk factors of SSPA for destruction of the femoral head within 12 months after the disease onset. Methods. This study enrolled 34 RDC patients with joint space narrowing > 2 mm within 12 months after the onset of hip pain and 25 HOA patients showing femoral head destruction. Sharp angle was measured for acetabular coverage evaluation. Femoral head collapse ratio was calculated for assessment of the extent of femoral head collapse by RDC. The following parameters of SSPA were evaluated using the whole spinopelvic radiograph: pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), thoracic kyphosis angle (TK), lumbar lordosis angle (LL), and PI-LL. Results. The HOA group showed higher Sharp angles compared with the RDC group. PT and PI-LL were higher in the RDC group than the HOA group. SS and LL were lower in the RDC group than the HOA group. No difference was found in PI, SVA, or TK between the groups. Femoral head collapse ratio was associated with PT, SS, SVA, LL, and PI-LL. A PI-LL > 20° and a PT > 30° correlated with greater extent of femoral head destruction by RDC. From regression analysis, SS and SVA were significantly associated with the femoral head collapse ratio within 12 months after disease onset. Conclusion. Compared with HOA, RDC in the early stage correlated with sagittal spinopelvic malalignment. SS and SVA may partially contribute to the extent of femoral head destruction by RDC within 12 months after the onset of hip pain. The present study indicates a potential role of SSPA assessment in identification of RDC patients at risk for subsequent bone destruction. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(1):77–84

Aims

The risk factors for abnormal spinopelvic mobility (SPM), defined as an anterior rotation of the spinopelvic tilt (∆SPT) ≥ 20° in a flexed-seated position, have been described. The implication of pelvic incidence (PI) is unclear, and the concept of lumbar lordosis (LL) based on anatomical limits may be erroneous. The distribution of LL, including a unusual shape in patients with a high lordosis, a low pelvic incidence, and an anteverted pelvis seems more relevant.