Does acetabular retroversion affect range of motion after total hip arthroplasty?

Authors:
Stephen J Incavo
Stephen J Incavo
Houston Methodist Hospital
Houston | United States
Jonathan E Gold
Jonathan E Gold
Institute of Orthopedic Research and Education
Philip C Noble
Philip C Noble
Institute of Orthopedic Research and Education
United States

Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011 Jan 28;469(1):218-24. Epub 2010 Jul 28.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Adult Reconstructive Surgery, The Methodist Hospital for Orthopaedics, 6550 Fannin, Suite 2500, Houston, TX 77030, USA.

Background: Increasingly, acetabular retroversion is recognized in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. Although prosthetic component positioning is not determined solely by native acetabular anatomy, acetabular retroversion presents a dilemma for component positioning if the surgeon implants the device in the anatomic position.

Questions/purposes: We asked (1) whether there is a difference in ROM between surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) and THA in the retroverted acetabulum, and (2) does increased femoral anteversion improve ROM in the retroverted acetabulum?

Methods: Using a motion analysis tracking system, we determined the ROM of eight cadaveric hips and then created virtual CT-reconstructed bone models of each specimen. ROM was determined with THA and SRA systems virtually implanted with (1) the acetabular component placed in 45° abduction and matching the acetabular anteversion (average 23° ± 4°); (2) virtually retroverting the bony acetabulum 10°; and (3) after anteverting the THA femoral stem 10°.

Results: SRA resulted in ROM deficiencies in four of six maneuvers, averaging 25% to 29% in the normal and retroverted acetabular positions. THA restored ROM in all six positions in the normal acetabulum and in four of the six retroverted acetabula. The two deficient positions averaged 5% deficiency. THA with increased femoral stem anteversion restored ROM in five positions and showed only a 2% deficiency in the sixth position. Compared with the intact hip, ROM deficits were seen after SRA in the normal and retroverted acetabular positions and to a lesser extent for THA which can be improved with increased femoral stem anteversion.

Conclusion: Poor ROM may result after SRA if acetabular retroversion is present.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1482-6DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3008864PMC

Still can't find the full text of the article?

We can help you send a request to the authors directly.
January 2011
31 Reads
2.770 Impact Factor

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

acetabular retroversion
16
femoral stem
12
increased femoral
12
rom
9
acetabular
9
rom positions
8
component positioning
8
acetabular positions
8
retroverted acetabular
8
normal retroverted
8
restored rom
8
tha
6
sra
5
retroverted
5
positions
5
tha increased
4
tha sra
4
virtual ct-reconstructed
4
stem anteversion
4
averaged deficiency
4

Similar Publications