Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Current Concepts in Acetabular Positioning in Total Hip Arthroplasty

  • Symposium - Total Hip Arthroplasty
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Being one of the most successful surgeries in the history of medicine, the indications for total hip arthroplasty have widened and are increasingly being offered to younger and fitter patients. This has also led to high expectations for longevity and outcomes. Acetabular cup position has a significant impact on the results of hip arthroplasty as it affects dislocation, abductor muscle strength, gait, limb lengths, impingement, noise generation, range of motion (ROM), wear, loosening, and cup failure. The variables in cup position are depth, height, and angular position (anteversion and inclination). The implications of change in depth of center of rotation (COR) are medialized versus anatomical positioning. As opposed to traditional medialization with beneficial effects on joint reaction force, the advantages of an anatomical position are increasingly recognized. The maintained acetabular offset offers advantages in terms of ROM, impingement, cortical rim press fit, and mamtaining medial bone stock. The height of COR influences muscle activity and limb lengths and available bone stock for cup support. On the other hand, ideal angular position remains a matter of much debate and reliably achieving a target angular position remains elusive. This is not helped by variations in the way we describe angular position, with operative, radiologic, or anatomic definitions being used variably to describe anteversion and inclination. Furthermore, pelvic tilt plays a major role in functional positions of the acetabulum. In addition, commonly used techniques of positioning often do not inform us of the real orientation of the pelvis on operating table, with possibility of significant adduction, flexion, and external rotation of the pelvis being possibilities. This review article brings together the evidence on cup positioning and aims to provide a systematic and pragmatic approach in achieving the best position in individual cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jenkins PJ, Clement ND, Hamilton DF, Gaston P, Pattern JT, Howie CR. Predicting the cost-effectiveness of total hip and knee replacement: A health economic analysis. Bone Joint J 2013;95-B: 115–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmerman JR. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1978;60:217–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Little NJ, Busch CA, Gallagher JA, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB. Acetabular polyethylene wear and acetabular inclination and femoral offset. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009;467:2895–900.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Sakalkale DP, Sharkey PF, Eng K, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH. Effect of femoral component offset on polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;388:125–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schmalzried TP, Shepherd EF, Dorey FJ, Jackson WO. dela Rosa M, Fa’vae F, et al. The John Charnley Award. Wear is a function of use, not time. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2000;381:36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Asayama I, Chamnongkich S, Simpson KJ, Kinsey TL, Mahoney OM. Reconstructed hip joint position and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:414–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kurtz WB, Ecker TM, Reichmann WM, Murphy SB. Factors affecting bony impingement in hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2010;25:624-34.el–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bonnin MP, Archbold PH, Basiglini L, Fessy MH, Beverland DE. Do we medialise the hip centre of rotation in total hip arthroplasty? Influence of acetabular offset and surgical technique. Hip Int 2012;22:371–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bonnin MP, Archbold PH, Basiglini L, Selmi TA, Beverland DE. Should the acetabular cup be medialised in total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 2011;21:428–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sexton SA, Yeung E, Jackson MP, Rajaratnam S, Martell JM, Walter WL, et al. The role of patient factors and implant position in squeaking of ceramic-on-ceramic total hip replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:439–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Walter WL, O’toole GC, Walter WK, Ellis A, Zicat BA. Squeaking in ceramic-on-ceramic hips: The importance of acetabular component orientation. J Arthroplasty 2007;22:496–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cassidy KA, Noticewala MS, Macaulay W, Lee JH, Geller JA. Effect of femoral offset on pain and function after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012;27:1863–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Frueh WW, Hozack WJ. Management of limb length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. Semin Arthroplasty 2005;16:127–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Parvizi J, Sharkey PF, Bissett GA, Rothman RH, Hozack WJ. Surgical treatment of limb-length discrepancy following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85-A: 2310–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Abolghasemian M, Samiezadeh S, Jafari D, Bougherara H, Gross AE, Ghazavi MT. Displacement of the hip center of rotation after arthroplasty of Crowe III and IV dysplasia: A radiological and biomechanical study. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:1031–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bicanic G, Delimar D, Delimar M, Pecina M. Influence of the acetabular cup position on hip load during arthroplasty in hip dysplasia. Int Orthop 2009;33:397–402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Traina F, De Fine M, Biondi F, Tassinari E, Galvani A, Toni A. The influence of the centre of rotation on implant survival using a modular stem hip prosthesis. Int Orthop 2009;33:1513–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Robinson M, Bornstein L, Mennear B, Bostrom M, Nestor B, Padgett D, et al. Effect of restoration of combined offset on stability of large head THA. Hip Int 2012;22:248–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sariali E, Klouche S, Mouttet A, Pascal-Moussellard H. The effect of femoral offset modification on gait after total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2014;85:123–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Charnley J. Low Friction Arthroplasty of the Hip – Theory and Practice. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 1979.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Nevelos J, Ingham E, Doyle C, Streicher R, Nevelos A, Walter W, et al. Microseparation of the centers of alumina-alumina artificial hip joints during simulator testing produces clinically relevant wear rates and patterns. J Arthroplasty 2000;15:793–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wroblewski BM, Siney PD, Fleming PA. Microseparation, fluid pressure and flow in failures of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasties. Bone Joint Res 2012;1:25–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Widmer KH. Containment versus impingement: Finding a compromise for cup placement in total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2007;31 Suppl 1:S29–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Malik A, Maheshwari A, Dorr LD. Impingement with total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:1832–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ranawat CS, Maynard MJ. Modern techniques of cemented total hip arthroplasty. Tech Orthop 1991;6:17–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dastane M, Dorr LD, Tarwala R, Wan Z. Hip offset in total hip arthroplasty: Quantitative measurement with navigation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:429–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Meermans G, Doom JV, Kats JJ. Restoration of the centre of rotation in primary total hip arthroplasty: The influence of acetabular floor depth and reaming technique. Bone Joint J 2016;98-B: 1597–603.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hirakawa K, Mitsugi N, Koshino T, Saito T, Hirasawa Y, Kubo T. Effect of acetabular cup position and orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;388:135–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Patil S, Bergula A, Chen PC, Colwell CW Jr., D’Lima DD. Polyethylene wear and acetabular component orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85-A Suppl 4:56–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. De Haan R Pattyn C, Gill HS, Murray DW, Campbell PA, De Smet K. Correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and metal ion levels in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:1291–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Murray DW. The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993;75:228–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Yoon YS, Hodgson AJ, Tonetti J, Masri BA, Duncan CP. Resolving inconsistencies in defining the target orientation for the acetabular cup angles in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2008;23:253–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Siebenrock KA, Kalbermatten DF, Ganz R. Effect of pelvic tilt on acetabular retroversion: A study of pelves from cadavers. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003;407:241–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lembeck B, Mueller O, Reize P, Wuelker N. Pelvic tilt makes acetabular cup navigation inaccurate. Acta Orthop 2005;76:517–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tannast M, Fritsch S, Zheng G, Siebenrock KA, Steppacher SD. Which radiographic hip parameters do not have to be corrected for pelvic rotation and tilt? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015;473:1255–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Polkowski GG, Nunley RM, Ruh EL, Williams BM, Barrack RL. Does standing affect acetabular component inclination and version after THA? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012;470:2988–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Mellano CR, Spitzer AI. How does pelvic rotation or tilt affect radiographic measurement of acetabular component inclination angle during THA? J Orthop 2015;12:222–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lazennec JY, Boyer P, Gorin M, Catonne Y, Rousseau MA. Acetabular anteversion with CT in supine, simulated standing, and sitting positions in a THA patient population. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:1103–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhu J, Wan Z, Dorr LD. Quantification of pelvic tilt in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:571–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Maratt JD, Esposito CI, McLawhorn AS, Jerabek SA, Padgett DE, Mayman DJ. Pelvic tilt in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty: When does it matter? J Arthroplasty 2015;30:387–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Abdel MP, von Roth P, Jennings MT, Hanssen AD, Pagnano MW. What safe zone? The vast majority of dislocated THAs are within the Lewinnek safe zone for acetabular component position. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016;474:386–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Esposito CI, Gladnick BP, Lee YY, Lyman S, Wright TM, Mayman DJ, et al. Cup position alone does not predict risk of dislocation after hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015;30:109–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Grammatopoulos G, Thomas GE, Pandit H, Beard DJ, Gill HS, Murray DW. The effect of orientation of the acetabular component on outcome following total hip arthroplasty with small diameter hard-on-soft bearings. Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:164–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Paterno SA, Lachiewicz PF, Kelley SS. The influence of patient-related factors and the position of the acetabular component on the rate of dislocation after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997;79:1202–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Pierchon F, Pasquier G, Cotten A, Fontaine C, Clarisse J, Duquennoy A. Causes of dislocation of total hip arthroplasty. CT study of component alignment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994;76:45–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Biedermann R, Tonin A, Krismer M, Rachbauer F, Eibl G, Stöckl B. Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: The effect of orientation of the acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87:762–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Dorr LD, Wan Z. Causes of and treatment protocol for instability of total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998;355:144–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Jolles BM, Zangger P, Leyvraz PF. Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: A multivariate analysis. J Arthroplasty 2002;17:282–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Masaoka T, Yamamoto K, Shishido T, Katori Y, Mizoue T, Shirasu H, et al. Study of hip joint dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2006;30:26–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. McCollum DE, Gray WJ. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Causes and prevention. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990;261:159–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Seki M, Yuasa N, Ohkuni K. Analysis of optimal range of socket orientations in total hip arthroplasty with use of computer-aided design simulation. J Orthop Res 1998;16:513–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Widmer KH, Zurfluh B. Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion. J Orthop Res 2004;22:815–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Yoshimine F. The influence of the oscillation angle and the neck anteversion of the prosthesis on the cup safe-zone that fulfills the criteria for range of motion in total hip replacements. The required oscillation angle for an acceptable cup safe-zone. J Biomech 2005;38:125–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Callanan MC, Jarrett B, Bragdon CR, Zurakowski D, Rubash HE, Freiberg AA, et al. The John Charnley Award: Risk factors for cup malpositioning: Quality improvement through a joint registry at a tertiary hospital. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:319–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Gonzalez Delia Valle A, Comba F, Taveras N, Salvati EA. The utility and precision of analogue and digital preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2008;32:289–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Knight JL, Atwater RD. Preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. Quantitating its utility and precision. J Arthroplasty 1992;7:403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Scheerlinck T. Primary hip arthroplasty templating on standard radiographs. A stepwise approach. Acta Orthop Belg 2010;76:432–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Edakalathur J, Bhaskar D, Thomas S, Board TN, Rajpura A. IPAR (Inferior edge of the posterior acetabular rim) and Its Relevance in Positioning of the Cup. Oral Presentation At: European Hip Society, Munich; 07 September, 2016.

  59. Dorr LD, Malik A, Wan Z, Long WT, Harris M. Precision and bias of imageless computer navigation and surgeon estimates for acetabular component position. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;465:92–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Moskal JT, Capps SG. Acetabular component positioning in total hip arthroplasty: An evidence-based analysis. J Arthroplasty 2011;26:1432–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Gandhi R, Marchie A, Farrokhyar F, Mahomed N. Computer navigation in total hip replacement: A meta-analysis. Int Orthop 2009;33:593–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Babisch JW, Layher F, Amiot LP. The rationale for tilt-adjusted acetabular cup navigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90:357–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Grammatopoulos G, Pandit HG, da Assunção R, Taylor A, McLardy-Smith P, De Smet KA, et al. Pelvic position and movement during hip replacement. Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:876–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Archbold HA, Mockford B, Molloy D, McConway J, Ogonda L, Beverland D. The transverse acetabular ligament: An aid to orientation of the acetabular component during primary total hip replacement: A preliminary study of 1000 cases investigating postoperative stability. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006;88:883–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Beverland DE, O’Neill CK, Rutherford M, Molloy D, Hill JC. Placement of the acetabular component. Bone Joint J 2016;98-B 1 Suppl A: 37–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Beverland D. The transverse acetabular ligament: Optimizing version. Orthopedics 2010;33:631.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Desai A, Barkatali B, Dramis A, Board TN. A simple intraoperative technique to avoid limb length discrepancy in total hip arthroplasty. Surgeon 2010;8:119–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Desai AS, Dramis A, Board TN. Leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty: A review of literature. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2013;6:336–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Hill JC, Archbold HA, Diamond OJ, Orr JF, Jaramaz B, Beverland DE. Using a calliper to restore the centre of the femoral head during total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012;94:1468–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Meermans G, Goetheer-Smits I, Lim RF, Van Doom WJ, Kats J. The difference between the radiographic and the operative angle of inclination of the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty: Use of a digital protractor and the circumference of the hip to improve orientation. Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:603–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Hill JC, Gibson DP, Pagoti R, Beverland DE. Photographic measurement of the inclination of the acetabular component in total hip replacement using the posterior approach. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92:1209–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Kanawade V, Dorr LD, Wan Z. Predictability of acetabular component angular change with postural shift from standing to sitting position. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014;96:978–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Phan D, Bederman SS, Schwarzkopf R. The influence of sagittal spinal deformity on anteversion of the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1017–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Centre for Hip Surgery, Wrightington Hospital, Hall Lane, Appley Bridge, WN6 9EP, Lancashire, UK

    Deepu Bhaskar, Asim Rajpura & Tim Board

Authors
  1. Deepu Bhaskar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Asim Rajpura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tim Board
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim Board.

Additional information

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhaskar, D., Rajpura, A. & Board, T. Current Concepts in Acetabular Positioning in Total Hip Arthroplasty. IJOO 51, 386–396 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_144_17

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_144_17

Keywords

MeSH terms

Search

Navigation