Aims

The aims of this study were to determine the change in pelvic sagittal alignment before, during, and after total hip arthroplasty (THA) undertaken with the patient in the lateral decubitus position, and to determine the impact of these changes on acetabular component position.

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

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

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

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.

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).

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.

There remains confusion in the literature with regard to the spinopelvic relationship, and its contribution to ideal acetabular component position. Critical assessment of the literature has been limited by use of conflicting terminology and definitions of new concepts that further confuse the topic. In 2017, the concept of a Hip-Spine Workgroup was created with the first meeting held at the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons Annual Meeting in 2018. The goal of this workgroup was to first help standardize terminology across the literature so that as a topic, multiple groups could produce literature that is immediately understandable and applicable. This consensus review from the Hip-Spine Workgroup aims to simplify the spinopelvic relationship, offer hip surgeons a concise summary of available literature, and select common terminology approved by both hip surgeons and spine surgeons for future research.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:808–816.

Orientation of the acetabular component influences wear, range of movement and the incidence of dislocation after total hip replacement (THR). During surgery, such orientation is often referenced to the anterior pelvic plane (APP), but APP inclination relative to the coronal plane (pelvic tilt) varies substantially between individuals. In contrast, the change in pelvic tilt from supine to standing (dPT) is small for nearly all individuals. Therefore, in THR performed with the patient supine and the patient’s coronal plane parallel to the operating table, we propose that freehand placement of the acetabular component placement is reliable and reflects standing (functional) cup position. We examined this hypothesis in 56 hips in 56 patients (19 men) with a mean age of 61 years (29 to 80) using three-dimensional CT pelvic reconstructions and standing lateral pelvic radiographs. We found a low variability of acetabular component placement, with 46 implants (82%) placed within a combined range of 30° to 50° inclination and 5° to 25° anteversion. Changing from the supine to the standing position (analysed in 47 patients) was associated with an anteversion change < 10° in 45 patients (96%). dPT was < 10° in 41 patients (87%). In conclusion, supine THR appears to provide reliable freehand acetabular component placement. In most patients a small reclination of the pelvis going from supine to standing causes a small increase in anteversion of the acetabular component.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1326–31.