The Reliability and Variation of Acetabular Component Anteversion Measurements From Cross-Table Lateral Radiographs
Section snippets
Clinical Data
Ninety-eight patients (119 hips) who underwent a primary THA (86 hips) or a femoral head and acetabular liner exchange with retention of a stable acetabular component (33 hips) between August 1996 and January 2003 were assessed with CT scan as a part of 2 institutional review board–approved studies at our institution. The patients also had a minimum of 3 postoperative CL radiographs (range, 3-6) taken as a part of their clinical follow-up. There were 49 men (61 hips) and 49 women (58 hips) with
Results
Anteversion values from CL x-rays had a mean of 26.1° ± 9.5° (range, −2° to 48.3°). Computed tomographic scan anteversion averaged 28.8° ± 11.8° (range, −7° to 54°). There was a significant, positive correlation between acetabular-version values on CL x-rays and on CT (P = .82, P < .001). The variation of anteversion values in serial CL x-rays of each patient averaged 6.1° ± 3.8° (range, 0°-18.3°). Neither sex (P = .68) nor BMI (P = .78) had a statistically significant influence on anteversion
Discussion
Obtaining optimal acetabular component position has been shown to be crucial for limiting dislocation, decreasing wear and rim-loading, and increasing impingement-free range of motion 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 24, 25, 26. Although a safe zone of component placement was initially advocated to minimize prosthetic dislocation, additional concerns have been noted with the use of hard-on-hard articulations. Langton et al [27] noted an increased early failure rate of metal-on-metal articulations associated with
References (35)
- et al.
The influence of acetabular component position on wear in total hip arthroplasty
J Arthroplasty
(2008) - et al.
Virtual reality computer animation of the effect of component position and design on stability after total hip arthroplasty
Orthop Clin North Am
(2001) - et al.
Computed tomography measurement of the accuracy of component version in total hip arthroplasty
J Arthroplasty
(2006) - et al.
Position of the acetabular cup—accuracy of radiographic calculation compared to CT-based measurement
Eur J Radiol
(2006) - et al.
Resolving inconsistencies in defining the target orientation for the acetabular cup angles in total hip arthroplasty
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)
(2008) - et al.
Difference between 2 measurement methods of version angles of the acetabular component
J Arthroplasty
(2007) A simplified method to determine acetabular cup anteversion from plain radiographs
J Arthroplasty
(2004)- et al.
Radiographic calculation of anteversion in acetabular prostheses
J Arthroplasty
(1995) - et al.
Can simple radiographs be predictive of total hip dislocation?
J Arthroplasty
(1995) - et al.
Squeaking in ceramic-on-ceramic hips: the importance of acetabular component orientation
J Arthroplasty
(2007)
Influence of component positions on dislocation: computed tomographic evaluations in a consecutive series of total hip arthroplasty
J Arthroplasty
Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: implant design and orientation
J Am Acad Orthop Surg
Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties
J Bone Joint Surg Am
Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: the effect of orientation of the acetabular component
J Bone Joint Surg Br
Polyethylene wear and acetabular component orientation
J Bone Joint Surg Am
Advances in surgical technique for total hip replacement: without and with osteotomy of the greater trochanter
Clin Orthop Relat Res
Computed tomography measurement of acetabular cup anteversion and retroversion in total hip arthroplasty
Clin Orthop Relat Res
Cited by (37)
Is Retention of the Acetabular Component at Revision Surgery a Long-Term Solution?
2023, Arthroplasty TodayTrans-lateral decubitus radiograph of the hip: A new view to measure the anteversion of the femoral stem
2021, Asian Journal of SurgeryGeoGebra: A reliable and free software for measuring acetabular cup anteversion on digitalized plain radiographs
2020, Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and TraumaCitation Excerpt :This difference in reliability was significant in our analysis and authors are not aware of any previous report attempting to compare the reliability of measuring anteversion in two types of cups. Some authors have preferred the cross-table lateral radiographs as these are easier to read for measuring anteversion25,26 but this method can be cumbersome and lead to errors due to movements of the pelvis during flexion of the opposite limb.27,28 Moreover, the direction of the central beam has to be ideally modified according to the angle of inclination, and the vertical plumb line might not always represent the true anteroposterior axis.29
Poor Acetabular Component Orientation Increases Revision Risk in Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasty
2017, Journal of Arthroplasty
No benefits or funds were received in support of the study.
This study was performed at Washington University School of Medicine and Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, MO.
The Conflict of Interest statement associated with this article can be found at doi:10.1016/j.arth.2011.03.039.