Total Hip Arthroplasty and the Spinopelvic Relationship: What's the Latest!

Although total hip arthroplasty (THA) has proved to be a successful surgical procedure, both prosthetic and bone impingement resulting in dislocation continue to occur. Studies have shown that spine pathology resulting in lumbar stiffness and hip arthritis often coexist. Spinopelvic mobility patterns during postural changes affect three-dimensional acetabular component position, which affects the incidence of prosthetic impingement and THA instability. Several spinopelvic risk factors that may affect THA stability have been identified. Numerous reports recommend performing a preoperative spinopelvic mobility analysis to identify risk factors and adjust acetabular component position accordingly to lessen the risk of impingement. In doing so, acetabular component position is individualized based on spinopelvic mobility patterns. Additionally, functional femoral anteversion, affected by individual femoral rotation patterns during dynamic activities, may contribute to the incidence of impingement. It is important to review the interrelationship between spine and pelvic mobility and how it relates to THA and may reduce the incidence of instability.

High Prevalence of Spinopelvic Risk Factors in Patients With Post-Operative Hip Dislocations.

BACKGROUND: Excessive standing posterior pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar spine stiffness, low pelvic incidence (PI), and severe sagittal spinal deformity (SSD) have been linked to increased dislocation rates. We aimed to determine the prevalence of these 4 parameters in a cohort of unstable total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients and compare these to a large representative control population of primary THA patients. METHODS: Forty-eight patients with instability following primary THA were compared to a control cohort of 9414 THA patients. Lateral X-rays in standing and flexed-seated positions were used to assess PT and lumbar lordosis (LL). Computed tomography scans were used to measure PI and acetabular cup orientation. Thresholds for "at risk" spinopelvic parameters were standing posterior PT ≤ -15°, lumbar flexion (LLstand-LLseated) ≤ 20°, PI ≤ 41°, PI ≥ 70°, and SSD (PI-LLstand mismatch ≥ 20°). RESULTS: There were significant differences in mean spinopelvic parameters between the dislocating and control cohorts (P < .001). There were no differences in mean PI (58° versus 56°, respectively, P = .29) or prevalence of high and low PI between groups. 67% of the dislocating patients had one or more significant risk factors, compared to only 11% of the control. A total of 71% of the dislocating patients had cup orientations within the traditional safe zone. CONCLUSION: Excessive standing posterior PT, low lumbar flexion, and a severe SSD are more prevalent in unstable THAs. Pre-op screening for these parameters combined with appropriate planning and implant selection may help identify at risk patients and reduce the prevalence of dislocation.

Sacral Slope Change From Standing to Relaxed-Seated Grossly Overpredicts the Presence of a Stiff Spine.

BACKGROUND: Several authors propose that a change in sacral slope of ≤10° between the standing and relaxed-seated positions (ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated) identifies a patient with a stiff lumbar spine and has suggested the use of dual-mobility bearings for such patients undergoing a total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to assess how accurately ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated can identify patients with a stiff spine. METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, consecutive cohort series of 312 patients had standing, relaxed-seated, and flexed-seated lateral radiographs prior to THA. ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated was determined by the change in sacral slope between the standing and relaxed-seated positions. Lumbar flexion (LF) was defined as the difference in lumbar lordotic angle between standing and flexed-seated. LF ≤20° was considered a stiff spine. The predictive value of ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated for characterizing a stiff spine was assessed. RESULTS: A weak correlation between ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated and LF was identified (r2 = 0.13). Eighty six patients (28%) had ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° and 19 patients (6%) had a stiff spine. Of the 86 patients with ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10°, 13 had a stiff spine. The positive predictive value of ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° for identifying a stiff spine was 15%. CONCLUSION: In this cohort, ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° was not correlated with a stiff spine. Using this simplified approach could lead to a 7-fold overprediction of patients with a stiff lumbar spine and abnormal spinopelvic mobility, unnecessary use of dual-mobility bearings, and incorrect component alignment targets. Referring to patients with ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° as being stiff is misleading. The flexed-seated position should be used to effectively assess a patient's spine mobility prior to THA.

Does Individualization of Cup Position Affect Prosthetic or Bone Impingement Following Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Spinopelvic (SP) mobility patterns during postural changes affect three-dimensional acetabular component position, the incidence of prosthetic impingement, and total hip arthroplasty (THA) instability. Surgeons have commonly placed the acetabular component in a similar "safe zone" for most patients. Our purpose was to determine the incidence of bone and prosthetic impingement with various cup orientations and determine if a preoperative SP analysis with individualized cup orientation lessens impingement. METHODS: A preoperative SP evaluation of 78 THA subjects was performed. Data were analyzed using a software program to determine the prevalence of prosthetic and bone impingement with a patient individualized cup orientation versus 6 commonly selected cup orientations. Impingement was correlated with known SP risk factors for dislocation. RESULTS: Prosthetic impingement was least with the individualized choice of cup position (9%) versus preselected cup positions (18%-61%). The presence of bone impingement (33%) was similar in all groups and not affected by cup position. Factors associated with impingement in flexion were age, lumbar flexion, pelvic tilt (stand to flexed seated), and functional femoral stem anteversion. Risk factors in extension included standing pelvic tilt, standing SP tilt, lumbar flexion, pelvic rotation (supine to stand and stand to flexed seated), and functional femoral stem anteversion. CONCLUSION: Prosthetic impingement is reduced with individualized cup positioning based on SP mobility patterns. Bone impingement occurred in one-third of patients and is a noteworthy consideration in preoperative THA planning. Known SP risk factors for THA instability correlated with the presence of prosthetic impingement in both flexion and extension.

The Effect of a Degenerative Spine and Adverse Pelvic Mobility on Prosthetic Impingement in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Despite the placement of acetabular components in the traditional "safe-zone", dislocations and all parts of the instability spectrum, including impingement, continue to be an issue. Recent research has established the importance of a degenerative spine and adverse pelvic mobility on functional acetabular orientation. The purpose of this study is to quantify the clinical consequences of a degenerative spine and adverse pelvic mobility on prosthetic impingement in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: Between January 2018 and December 2019, a series of 1592 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty had functional lateral radiographs and a computed tomography scan taken. Two spinal parameters and 2 pelvic mobility parameters were investigated for their association with impingement. Each patient was evaluated for anterior and posterior impingement, at all orientations within a traditional supine safe zone and a patient-specific functional safe zone. RESULTS: Patients with limited lumbar flexion (stiff spine), higher pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (sagittal imbalance), and more anterior pelvic mobility from stand to flexed-seated, exhibit increased anterior impingement. Patients with larger posterior pelvic mobility from supine-to-stand exhibited increased posterior impingement. Impingement was reduced 3-fold when the target cup orientation was tailored to a patient's functional safe zone rather than a generic target. Six percent of patients showed unavoidable impingement even with an optimized functional cup orientation. CONCLUSION: Our results support growing evidence that patients with a degenerative spine and adverse pelvic mobility are likely to have unfavorable functional cup orientations, resulting in prosthetic impingement. Preoperative functional radiographic screening is recommended to assess the likelihood of a patient experiencing impingement due to their unique spinopelvic mobility.

Prevalence of Risk Factors for Adverse Spinopelvic Mobility Among Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patients with adverse spinopelvic mobility have higher complication rates following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Risk factors include a stiff lumbar spine, standing posterior pelvic tilt ≤ -10°, and a severe sagittal spinal deformity (pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch ≥20°). The purpose of this study is to define the spinopelvic risk factors and quantify the prevalence of risk factors for pathologic spinopelvic mobility. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis from January 2014 to February 2020 was performed on a multicenter series of 9414 primary THAs by 168 surgeons, all with preoperative spinopelvic measurements in the supine, standing, and flex-seated positions. All patients were included. The prevalence of adverse spinopelvic mobility and frequency of each spinopelvic risk factor was calculated. RESULTS: The cohort was 52% female, 48% male, with an average age of 65 years. Thirteen percent of patients exhibited adverse spinopelvic mobility and 17% had one or more of the 3 risk factors. Adverse mobility was found in 35% of patients with at least 1 risk factor, 47% with at least 2 risk factors, and 57% with all 3 risk factors. CONCLUSION: Forty-six percent of patients had spinopelvic pathology driven by one or more of the risk factors. Number of risk factors present and risk of adverse spinopelvic mobility were positively correlated, with 57% of patients with all 3 risk factors exhibiting adverse spinopelvic mobility. Although this study defines the prevalence of these risk factors in this highly selected cohort, it does not report incidence in a general THA population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV.

Does Prosthetic or Bony Impingement Occur More Often in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Dynamic Preoperative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Impingement is a leading cause for instability resulting in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Impingement can be prosthetic, bony, or soft tissue. The purpose of this study is to investigate, using a virtual simulation, whether bony or prosthetic impingement presents first in well-positioned THAs. METHODS: Twenty-three patients requiring THA were planned for a ceramic-on-poly cementless construct using dynamic planning software. Cups were orientated at 45° inclination and 25° anteversion when standing. Femoral components and neck lengths were positioned to reproduce native anteversion and match contralateral leg length and offset. The type and location of impingement was then recorded with recreation of anterior and posterior impingement during standard and extreme ranges of motion (ROM). RESULTS: In standard ROM, flexion produced both prosthetic and bony impingement and extension resulted in prosthetic impingement in models with lipped liners. In extreme ROM, anterior impingement was 78% bony in 32-mm articulations, and 88% bony in 36-mm articulations. Posterior impingement was 65% prosthetic in 32-mm articulations, and 55% prosthetic in 36-mm articulations. Dual mobility cups showed the greatest risk of posterior prosthetic impingement in hyperextension (74%). CONCLUSION: In standard ROM, both bony and prosthetic impingement occurred in flexion, while prosthetic impingement occurred in extension in models with lipped liners. In hyperextension, prosthetic impingement was more common than bony impingement, and was exclusively the cause of impingement when a lip was used. In flexion, impingement was primarily bony with the use of a 36-mm head. The risk of posterior prosthetic impingement was greatest with dual mobility cups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

The Majority of Total Hip Arthroplasty Patients With a Stiff Spine Do Not Have an Instrumented Fusion.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients with limited lumbar flexion (LF) have increased rates of dislocation. An instrumented spinal fusion is a well-recognized cause whose risk increases with increasing number of levels fused. However, many patients without an instrumented fusion (IF) also exhibit abnormal spinopelvic mobility. The purpose of this study was to understand the proportion of THA patients without an IF that have a stiff spine (SS) and behave as if they are surgically fused. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on 6340 primary THA patients, all of whom had preoperative spinopelvic measurements. Any IF of the lumbar spine was observed on the lateral standing radiograph and recorded. SS was classified by LF ≤ 20°, and the percentage of patients with an IF and limited LF was determined. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-six (6%) patients had a SS, and only 67 (19%) had an IF. Of the entire 6340 patients, 207 (3%) had an IF. Of these 207, only 67 (32%) had a SS. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority (81%) of THA patients with a SS do not have an IF. We recommend preoperative spinopelvic assessment of all patients undergoing THA, as only a minority of those with limited LF have an IF and may otherwise be overlooked. Lumbar degenerative disc disease is common in THA patients, limits the available LF in the same way an IF might and potentially increases the risk of dislocation in this subset of patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Reliability of the transverse acetabular ligament as a landmark for functional cup anteversion in total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The transverse acetabular ligament (TAL) can be a useful and reproducible landmark in the orientation of the acetabular cup in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Its role in guiding cup orientation when aiming to implant in a functional anteversion orientation is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between the TAL and the planned acetabular cup anteversion when implanted in a function orientation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a retrospective study the anteversion of the TAL in the contralateral un-replaced hip was measured in CT scans of patients undergoing THA and compared to the functional cup anteversion using the patient-specific spinopelvic parameters. Comparative measurements of the native acetabular version were made from the superior rim to the inferior rim and at 10 mm intervals between the 2, all in reference to the anterior pelvic plane. RESULTS: 96 hips were measured. The mean TAL anteversion angle was 17.2° ± 4.5°. The mean planned acetabular cup anteversion angle was 26.3° ± 4.7°. Pearson's correlation coefficient of this measurement with the TAL was -0.03 (p = 0.769). There was a significant difference between the planned acetabular cup anteversion and the measurement of the TAL (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: If cups are implanted parallel to the TAL, almost 80% will be >5° different to targeted functional cup version. It should be aimed to implant cups with more anteversion than the TAL indicates.

Hip-spine parameters change with increasing age.

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. Methods: A multicentre database with preoperative imaging for 15,830 THA patients was reviewed. Spinopelvic parameter measurements were made by experienced engineers, including anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPT), spinopelvic tilt (SPT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), and pelvic incidence (PI). Lumbar flexion (LF), sagittal spinal deformity, and hip user index (HUI) were calculated using parameter measurements. Results: With advancing age, patients demonstrate increased posterior APPT, decreased standing LL, decreased LF, higher pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, higher prevalence of abnormal spinopelvic mobility, and higher HUI percentage. With each decade, APPT progressed posteriorly 2.1°, LF declined 6.0°, PI-LL mismatch increased 2.9°, and spinopelvic mobility increased 3.8°. Significant differences were found between the sexes for APPT, SPT, SS, LL, and LF, but were not felt to be clinically relevant. Conclusion: With advancing age, spinopelvic biomechanics demonstrate decreased spinal mobility and increased pelvic/hip mobility. Surgeons should consider the higher prevalence of instability risk factors in elderly patients and anticipate changes evolving in spinopelvic biomechanics for young patients.

Excessive posterior pelvic tilt from preoperative supine to postoperative standing after total hip arthroplasty.

Aims: Excessive posterior pelvic tilt (PT) may increase the risk of anterior instability after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to investigate the changes in PT occurring from the preoperative supine to postoperative standing position following THA, and identify factors associated with significant changes in PT. Methods: Supine PT was measured on preoperative CT scans and standing PT was measured on preoperative and one-year postoperative standing lateral radiographs in 933 patients who underwent primary THA. Negative values indicate posterior PT. Patients with > 13° of posterior PT from preoperative supine to postoperative standing (ΔPT ≤ -13°) radiographs, which corresponds to approximately a 10° increase in functional anteversion of the acetabular component, were compared with patients with less change (ΔPT > -13°). Logistic regression analysis was used to assess preoperative demographic and spinopelvic parameters predictive of PT changes of ≤ -13°. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) determined the diagnostic accuracy of the predictive factors. Results: PT changed from a mean of 3.8° (SD 6.0°)) preoperatively to -3.5° (SD 6.9°) postoperatively, a mean change of -7.4 (SD 4.5°; p < 0.001). A total of 95 patients (10.2%) had ≤ -13° change in PT from preoperative supine to postoperative standing. The strongest predictive preoperative factors of large changes in PT (≤ -13°) from preoperative supine to postoperative standing were a large posterior change in PT from supine to standing, increased supine PT, and decreased standing PT (p < 0.001). Flexed-seated PT (p = 0.006) and female sex (p = 0.045) were weaker significant predictive factors. When including all predictive factors, the accuracy of the AUC prediction was 84.9%, with 83.5% sensitivity and 71.2% specificity. Conclusion: A total of 10% of patients had > 13° of posterior PT postoperatively compared with their supine pelvic position, resulting in an increased functional anteversion of > 10°. The strongest predictive factors of changes in postoperative PT were the preoperative supine-to-standing differences, the anterior supine PT, and the posterior standing PT. Surgeons who introduce the acetabular component with the patient supine using an anterior approach should be aware of the potentially large increase in functional anteversion occurring in these patients.

Pelvic incidence significance relative to spinopelvic risk factors for total hip arthroplasty instability.

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.

Spinopelvic mobility affects accuracy of acetabular anteversion measurements on cross-table lateral radiographs.

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.

Variation in femoral anteversion in patients requiring total hip replacement.

BACKGROUND: Optimal implant alignment is important for total hip replacement (THR) longevity. Femoral stem anteversion is influenced by the native femoral anteversion. Knowing a patient's femoral morphology is therefore important when planning optimal THR alignment. We investigated variation in femoral anteversion across a patient population requiring THR. METHODS: Preoperatively, native femoral neck anteversion was measured from 3-dimensional CT reconstructions in 1215 patients. RESULTS: The median femoral anteversion was 14.4° (-27.1-54.5°, IQR 7.4-20.9°). There were significant gender differences (males 12.7°, females 16.0°; p < 0.0001). Femoral anteversion in males decreased significantly with increasing age. 14% of patients had extreme anteversion (<0° or >30°). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest series investigating native femoral anteversion in a THR population. Patient variation was large and was similar to published findings of a non-THR population. Gender and age-related differences were observed. Native femoral anteversion is patient-specific and should be considered when planning THR.

Clinical accuracy of a patient-specific femoral osteotomy guide in minimally-invasive posterior hip arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Patient specific guides can be a valuable tool in improving the precision of planned femoral neck osteotomies, especially in minimally invasive hip surgery, where bony landmarks are often inaccessible. The aim of our study was to validate the accuracy of a novel patient specific femoral osteotomy guide for THR through a minimally invasive posterior approach, the direct superior approach (DSA). METHODS: As part of our routine preoperative planning 30 patients underwent low dose CT scans of their arthritic hip. 3D printed patient specific femoral neck osteotomy guides were then produced. Intraoperatively, having cleared all soft tissue from the postero-lateral neck of the enlocated hip, the guide was placed and pinned onto the posterolateral femoral neck. The osteotomy was performed using an oscillating saw and the uncemented hip components were implanted as per routine. Postoperatively, the achieved level of the osteotomy at the medial calcar was compared with the planned level of resection using a 3D/2D matching analysis (Mimics X-ray module, Materialise, Belgium). RESULTS: A total of 30 patients undergoing uncemented Trinity acetabular and TriFit TS femoral component arthroplasty (Corin, UK) were included in our analysis. All but one of our analysed osteotomies were found to be within 3 mm from the planned height of osteotomy. In one patient the level of osteotomy deviated 5 mm below the planned level of resection. CONCLUSION: Preoperative planning and the use of patient specific osteotomy guides provides an accurate method of performing femoral neck osteotomies in minimally invasive hip arthroplasty using the direct superior approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (Case series).