Advertisement

Associations between implant alignment or position and patient-reported outcomes after total hip arthroplasty

  • Takeshi Shoji
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, Japan.
    Affiliations
    Department of Artificial Joints and Biomaterials, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan

    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Tadashi Inoue
    Affiliations
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Yuichi Kato
    Affiliations
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Yusuke Fujiwara
    Affiliations
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Junichi Sumii
    Affiliations
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Hideki Shozen
    Affiliations
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Nobuo Adachi
    Affiliations
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan
    Search for articles by this author

      Highlights

      • We evaluated the associations between implant settings and satisfaction in total hip arthroplasty.
      • Stem anteversion and sagittal alignment were associated with post-operative satisfaction.
      • Combined anteversion and femoral offset were also associated with post-operative patient's satisfaction.
      • Cup position and alignment had no association with patient's post-operative satisfaction.

      Abstract

      Background

      We aimed to evaluate the associations between implant alignment/position and patient-reported outcomes following total hip arthroplasty using CT-based simulation software.

      Methods

      We reviewed hips of 137 patients (27 males, 110 females, mean age: 67.3 years old) who underwent total hip arthroplasty. Radiographic evaluations were based on the software for evaluation of the parameters related to implant alignment/position and femoral/3-dimensional offset using post-operative CT data. Pre-operative and one-year post-operative patient-reported outcomes using Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire scores were evaluated.

      Findings

      The total and movement scores of normal combined anteversion and stem anteversion angle groups were significantly higher than those of lower and higher groups. The pain and movement scores of decreased femoral offset group were significantly lower than those of restored and increased femoral offset group. There were no significant differences in all scores in cup inclination and anteversion angle, stem coronal alignment, and 3-dimensional femoral offset among groups. Moreover, investigation of the associations between combined anteversion angle/stem anteversion/femoral offset and movement scores revealed that combined anteversion angle and stem anteversion were significantly associated with the movement that needs deep hip flexion and occasionally deep abduction, and high femoral offset was also associated with the movement that needs deep hip flexion.

      Interpretation

      Surgeons should consider the stem anteversion, stem sagittal alignment, and combined anteversion, in addition to the femoral offset to achieve patient's post-operative satisfaction, although the surgeon may have a relatively larger choice for the implant positioning, especially on the cup side.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Biomechanics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Asayama I.
        • Chamnongkich S.
        • Simpson K.J.
        • Kinsey T.L.
        • Mahoney O.M.
        Reconstructed hip joint position and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty.
        J. Arthroplast. 2005; 20: 414-420https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2004.01.016
        • Bae S.C.
        • Lee H.S.
        • Yun H.R.
        • Kim T.H.
        • Yoo D.H.
        • Kim S.Y.
        Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Korean Western Ontario and McMaster universities (WOMAC) and Lequesne osteoarthritis indices for clinical research.
        Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2001; 9: 746-750https://doi.org/10.1053/joca.2001.0471
        • Boese C.K.
        • Bredow J.
        • Ettinger M.
        • Eysel P.
        • Thorey F.
        • Lechler P.
        • Budde S.
        The influence of hip rotation on femoral offset following short stem total hip arthroplasty.
        J. Arthroplast. 2016 Jan; 31: 312-316
        • Brooks P.J.
        Dislocation following total hip replacement: causes and cures.
        Bone Joint J. 2013; 95–B: 67-69https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.32645
        • Charnley J.
        Total hip replacement by low-friction arthroplasty.
        Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1970; 72: 7-21https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-197009000-00003
        • D’Lima D.D.
        • Urquhart A.G.
        • Buehler K.O.
        • Walker R.H.
        • Colwell Jr., C.W.
        The effect of the orientation of the acetabular and femoral components on the range of motion of the hip at different head–neck ratios.
        J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2000; 82: 315-321https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200003000-00003
        • Dorr L.D.
        • Malik A.
        • Dastane M.
        • Wan Z.
        Combined anteversion technique for total hip arthroplasty.
        Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2009; 467: 119-127https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-008-0598-4
        • Heller M.O.
        • Bergmann G.
        • Deuretzbacher G.
        • Claes L.
        • Haas N.P.
        • Duda G.N.
        Influence of femoral anteversion on proximal femoral loading: measurement and simulation in four patients.
        Clin Biomech. (Bristol, Avon). 2001; 16: 644-649https://doi.org/10.1016/s0268-0033(01)00053-5
        • Hemmerich A.
        • Brown H.
        • Smith S.
        • Marthandam S.S.
        • Wyss U.P.
        Hip, knee, and ankle kinematics of high range of motion activities of daily living.
        J. Orthop. Res. 2006; 24: 770-781https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.20114
        • Hjorth M.H.
        • Stilling M.
        • Lorenzen N.D.
        • Jakobsen S.S.
        • Soballe K.
        • Mechlenburg I.
        Block-step asymmetry 5 years after large-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty is related to lower muscle mass and leg power on the implant side.
        Clin. Biomech. 2014 Jun; 29: 684-690
        • Ji H.M.
        • Won S.H.
        • Han J.
        • Won Y.Y.
        Does femoral offset recover and affect the functional outcome of patients with displaced femoral neck fracture following hemiarthroplasty?.
        Injury. 2017; 48: 1170-1174
        • Jolles B.M.
        • Zangger P.
        • Leyvraz P.F.
        Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. A multivariate analysis.
        J. Arthroplast. 2002; 17: 282-288https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2002.30286
        • Krishnan H.
        • Krishnan S.P.
        • Blunn G.
        • Skinner J.A.
        • Hart A.J.
        Modular neck femoral stems.
        Bone Joint J. 2013; 95–B: 1011-1021https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B8.31525
        • Lewinnek G.E.
        • Lewis J.L.
        • Tarr R.
        • Compere C.L.
        • Zimmerman J.R.
        Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties.
        J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 1978; 60: 217-220https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-197860020-00014
        • Liebs T.R.
        • Nasser L.
        • Herzberg W.
        • Rüther W.
        • Hassenpflug J.
        The influence of femoral offset on healthrelated quality of life after total hip replacement.
        Bone Joint J. 2014; 96–B: 36-42https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.96B1.31530
        • Mahmood S.S.
        • Mukka S.S.
        • Crnalic S.
        • Wretenberg P.
        • Sayed-Noor A.S.
        1Association between changes in global femoral offset after total hip arthroplasty and function, quality of life, and abduc1tor muscle strength.
        Acta Orthop. 2016; 87: 36-41https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1091955
        • Malik A.
        • Maheshwari A.
        • Dorr L.D.
        Impingement with total hip replacement.
        J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2007; 89: 1832-1842https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.01313
        • Marx R.G.
        • Jones E.C.
        • Atwan N.C.
        • Closkey R.F.
        • Salvati E.A.
        • Sculco T.P.
        Measuring improvement following total hip and knee arthroplasty using patient-based measures of outcome.
        J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2005; 87: 1999-2005https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02286
        • Matsumoto T.
        • Kaneuji A.
        • Hiejima Y.
        • Sugiyama H.
        • Akiyama H.
        • Atsumi T.
        • Ishii M.
        • Izumi K.
        • Ichiseki T.
        • Ito H.
        • Okawa T.
        • Ohzono K.
        • Otsuka H.
        • Kishida S.
        • Kobayashi S.
        • Sawaguchi T.
        • Sugano N.
        • Nakajima I.
        • Nakamura S.
        • Hasegawa Y.
        • Fukuda K.
        • Fujii G.
        • Mawatari T.
        • Mori S.
        • Yasunaga Y.
        • Yamaguchi M.
        Japanese Orthopaedic association hip disease evaluation questionnaire (JHEQ): a patient-based evaluation tool for hip-joint disease. The subcommittee on hip disease evaluation of the clinical outcome committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic association.
        J. Orthop. Sci. 2012; 17: 25-38https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-011-0166-8
        • Mulholland S.J.
        • Wyss U.P.
        Activities of daily living in non Western cultures: range of motion requirements for hip and knee joint implants.
        Int. J. Rehabil. Res. 2001; 24: 191-198https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-200109000-00004
        • Müller M.
        • Abdel M.P.
        • Wassilew G.I.
        • Duda G.
        • Perka C.
        Do post-operative changes of neck–shaft angle and femoral component anteversion have an effect on clinical outcome following uncemented total hip arthroplasty?.
        Bone Joint J. 2015; 97–B: 1615-1622https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.97B12.34654
        • Nakashima Y.
        • Hirata M.
        • Akiyama M.
        • Itokawa T.
        • Yamamoto T.
        • Motomura G.
        • Ohishi M.
        • Hamai S.
        • Iwamoto Y.
        Combined anteversion technique reduced the dislocation in cementless total hip arthroplasty.
        Int. Orthop. 2014; 38: 27-32https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-2091-2
        • Sariali E.
        • Klouche S.
        • Mamoudy P.
        Investigation into three dimensional hip anatomy in anterior dislocation after THA. Influence of the position of the hip rotation Centre.
        Clin. Biomech. 2012 Jul; 27: 562-567
        • Shoji T.
        • Yasunaga Y.
        • Yamasaki T.
        • Mori R.
        • Hamanishi M.
        • Ochi M.
        Bony impingement depends on the bone morphology of the hip after total hip arthroplasty.
        Int. Orthop. 2013; 37: 1897-1903https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-1979-1
        • Shoji T.
        • Yasunaga Y.
        • Yamasaki T.
        • Mori R.
        • Hamanishi M.
        Ochi M low femoral antetorsion and total hip arthroplasty: a risk factor.
        Int. Orthop. 2014; 2015: 7-12
        • Shoji T.
        • Yasunaga Y.
        • Yamasaki T.
        • Izumi S.
        • Adachi N.
        • Ochi M.
        Anterior inferior iliac spine bone morphology in hip dysplasia and its effect on hip range of motion in total hip arthroplasty.
        J. Arthroplast. 2016; 31: 2058-2063https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.018
        • Shoji T.
        • Yamasaki T.
        • Izumi S.
        • Hachisuka S.
        • Ochi M.
        The influence of stem offset and neck shaft angles on the range of motion in total hip arthroplasty.
        Int. Orthop. 2016; 40: 245-253https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2826-3
        • Shoji T.
        • Yamasaki T.
        • Izumi S.
        • Kenji M.
        • Sawa M.
        • Yasunaga Y.
        • Adachi N.
        The effect of cup medialization and lateralization on hip range of motion in total hip arthroplasty.
        Clin. Biomech. (Bristol Avon). 2018 Aug; 57: 121-128
        • Vigdorchik J.M.
        • Sharma A.K.
        • Elbuluk A.M.
        • Carroll K.M.
        • Mayman D.J.
        • Lieberman J.R.
        High offset stems are protective of dislocation in high-risk Total hip arthroplasty.
        J. Arthroplast. 2021 Jan; 36: 210-216
        • Warschawski Y.
        • Garceau S.P.
        • Joly D.A.
        • Kuzyk P.
        • Gross A.
        • Safir O.
        The effect of femoral head size, neck length, and offset on dislocation rates of constrained acetabular liners.
        J. Arthroplast. 2021 Jan; 36: 345-348
        • Widmer K.H.
        • Majewski M.
        The impact of the CCD-angle on range of motion and cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty.
        Clin. Biomech. 2005 Aug; 20: 723-728
        • Widmer K.H.
        • Zurfluh B.
        Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion.
        J. Orthop. Res. 2004; 22: 815-821https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orthres.2003.11.001
        • Wines A.P.
        • McNicol D.
        Computed tomography measurement of the accuracy of component version in total hip arthroplasty.
        J. Arthroplast. 2006; 21: 696-701https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2005.11.008
        • Woelfle J.V.
        • Fraitzl C.R.
        • Reichel H.
        • Wernerus D.
        • Woelfle J.V.
        • Fraitzl C.R.
        • Reichel H.
        • Wernerus D.
        Significantly reduced leg length discrepancy and increased femoral offset by application of a head-neck adapter in revision total hip arthroplasty.
        J. Arthroplast. 2014 Jun; 29: 1301-1307
        • Wu G.
        • Siegler S.
        • Allard P.
        • Kirtley C.
        • Leardini A.
        • Rosenbaum D.
        • Whittle M.
        • D’Lima D.D.
        • Cristofolini L.
        • Witte H.
        • Schmid O.
        • Stokes I.
        Standardization and terminology Committee of the International Society of biomechanics. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion-part I: ankle, hip, and spine.
        J. Biomech. 2002; 35: 543-548https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9290(01)00222-6