The effect of pelvic tilt (PT) and sagittal balance in hips with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with acetabular retroversion (AR) is controversial. It is unclear if patients with AR have a rotational abnormality of the iliac wing. Therefore, we asked: are parameters for sagittal balance, and is rotation of the iliac wing, different in patients with AR compared to a control group?; and is there a correlation between iliac rotation and acetabular version? A retrospective, review board-approved, controlled study was performed including 120 hips in 86 consecutive patients with symptomatic FAI or hip dysplasia. Pelvic CT scans were reviewed to calculate parameters for sagittal balance (pelvic incidence (PI), PT, and sacral slope), anterior pelvic plane angle, pelvic inclination, and external rotation of the iliac wing and were compared to a control group (48 hips). The 120 hips were allocated to the following groups: AR (41 hips), hip dysplasia (47 hips) and cam FAI with normal acetabular morphology (32 hips). Subgroups of total AR (15 hips) and high acetabular anteversion (20 hips) were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction.Aims
Methods
“Get It Right First Time” (GIRFT) and NHS England’s Best Practice Tariff (BPT) have published directives advising that patients over the ages of 65 (GIRFT) and 69 years (BPT) receiving total hip arthroplasty (THA) should receive cemented implants and have brought in financial penalties if this policy is not observed. Despite this, worldwide, uncemented component use has increased, a situation described as a ‘paradox’. GIRFT and BPT do, however, acknowledge more data are required to support this edict with current policies based on the National Joint Registry survivorship and implant costs. This study compares THA outcomes for over 1,000 uncemented Corail/Pinnacle constructs used in all age groups/patient frailty, under one surgeon, with identical pre- and postoperative pathways over a nine-year period with mean follow-up of five years and two months (range: nine months to nine years and nine months). Implant information, survivorship, and regular postoperative Oxford Hip Scores (OHS) were collected and two comparisons undertaken: a comparison of those aged over 65 years with those 65 and under and a second comparison of those aged 70 years and over with those aged under 70.Aims
Methods
