Abstract
Introduction
Most of studies on Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) are focused on acetabular cup orientation. Even though the literature suggests that femoral anteversion and combined anteversion have a clinical impact on THA stability, there are not many reports on these parameters. Combined anteversion can be considered morphologically as the addition of anatomical acetabular and femoral anteversions (Anatomical Combined Anatomical Anteversion ACA). It is also possible to evaluate the Combined Functional Anteversion (CFA) generated by the relative functional position of femoral and acetabular implants while standing. This preliminary study is focused on the comparison of the anatomical and functional data in asymptomatic THA patients.
Material and methods
50 asymptomatic unilateral THA patients (21 short stems and 29 standard stems) have been enrolled. All patients underwent an EOS low dose evaluation in standing position.
SterEOS software was used for the 3D measurements of cup and femur orientation. Cup anatomical anteversion (CAA) was computed as the cup anteversion in axial plane perpendicular to the Anterior Pelvic Plane. Femoral anatomical anteversion (FAA) was computed as the angle between the femoral neck axis and the posterior femoral condyles in a plane perpendicular to femoral mechanical axis. Functional anteversions for the cup (CFA) and femur (FFA) were measured in the horizontal axial patient plane in standing position. Both anatomical and functional cumulative anteversions were calculated as a sum. All 3D measures were evaluated and compared for the repeatability and reproducibility
Statistical analysis used Mann-Whitney U-test considering the non-normal distribution of data and the short number of patients (<30 for each group).
Results
Functional cumulative anteversion was significantly higher than anatomical cumulative anteversion for all groups (p<0.05). No significant difference could be noted between the cases according to the use of short or standard stems.
Conclusion
This study shows the difference of functional implant orientation as compared to the anatomical measurements. This preliminary study has limitations. First the limited sample of patients. Then this series only includes asymptomatic subjects. Nevertheless, this work focused on the feasibility of the measurements shows the potential interest of a functional analysis of cumulated anteversion. Standing position influences the relative position of THA implants according to the frontal and sagittal orientation of the pelvis.
The relevance of these functional measurements in instability cases must be demonstrated, especially in patients with anterior subluxation in standing position which is potentially associated with pelvic adaptative extension. Further studies are needed for the feasibility of measurements on EOS images in sitting position and their analysis in case of instability.
For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly.
