Is It Necessary to Obtain Lateral Pelvic Radiographs in Flexed Seated Position for Preoperative Total Hip Arthroplasty Planning?

Background: Many of the current total hip arthroplasty (THA) planning tools only consider sagittal pelvic tilt in the standing and relaxed sitting positions. Considering that the risk of postoperative dislocation is higher when bending forward or in sit-to-stand move, sagittal pelvic tilt in the flexed seated position may be more relevant for preoperative planning. We hypothesized that there was a significant difference in sagittal pelvic tilt between the relaxed sitting and flexed seated positions as measured by the sacral slope in preoperative and postoperative full-body radiographs. Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective analysis of the preoperative and postoperative simultaneous biplanar full-body radiographs of 93 primary THA patients in standing, relaxed sitting, and flexed seated positions. The sagittal pelvic tilt was measured using the sacral slope relative to the horizontal line. Results: The mean difference between the preoperative sacral slope in the relaxed sitting position and the flexed seated position was 11.3° (-13° to 43°) (P < .0001). This difference was >10° in 52 patients (56%) and >20° in 18 patients (19.4%). The mean difference between the postoperative sacral slope in a relaxed sitting position and the sacral slope in a flexed seated position was 11.3° (P < .0001). This difference was >10° in 51 patients (54.9%) and >30° in 14 patients (15.1%) postoperatively. Conclusions: There was a significant difference in sagittal pelvic tilt between the relaxed and flexed seated positions. A flexed seated view provides valuable information that might be more relevant for preoperative THA planning in order to prevent postoperative THA instability.

The Current Proposed Total Hip Arthroplasty Surgical Planning Guidelines Based on Classification of Spine Stiffness May be Flawed Due to Incorrect Assumptions.

BACKGROUND: The available classifications and preoperative planning tools for total hip arthroplasty assume that: 1) there is no variation in the sagittal pelvic tilt (SPT) if the radiographs are repeated, and 2) there is no significant change in the postoperative SPT postoperatively. We hypothesized that there would be significant differences in postoperative SPT tilt as measured by the sacral slope, thus rendering the current classifications and tools flawed. METHODS: This study was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of preoperative and postoperative (1.5-6 months) full-body imaging of 237 primary total hip arthroplasty (standing and sitting positions). Patients were categorized as 1) stiff spine (standing sacral slope sitting sacral slope < 10°) and 2) normal spine (standing sacral slope-sitting sacral slope ≥ 10°). Results were compared using the paired t-test. The posthoc power analysis showed a power of 0.99. RESULTS: The difference in mean standing and sitting sacral slope between the preoperative and postoperative measurements was 1°. However, in standing position, this difference was more than 10° in 14.4% of patients. In the sitting position, this difference was more than 10° in 34.2% of patients and more than 20° in 9.8% of patients. Postoperatively, 32.5% of patients switched groups based on the classification, which rendered the preoperative planning suggested by the current classifications flawed. CONCLUSION: Current preoperative planning and classifications are based on a single acquisition of preoperative radiographs without the incorporation of possible postoperative changes in SPT. Validated classifications and planning tools should incorporate repeated measurements to determine the mean and variance in SPT and consider the significant postoperative changes in SPT.