Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
HSS Journal ®
Published in: HSS Journal ® 1/2016

01-02-2016 | Original Article

Anteroposterior Radiographs Are More Accurate than Cross-Table Lateral Radiographs for Acetabular Anteversion Assessment: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Authors: Peter K. Sculco, MD, Alexander S. McLawhorn, MD, MBA, Kaitlin M. Carroll, BS, Benjamin A. McArthur, MD, David J. Mayman, MD

Published in: HSS Journal ® | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Measuring acetabular anteversion is relevant to routine follow-up of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and for malfunctioning THAs. Imageless navigation facilitates acetabular component orientation relative to the anterior pelvic plane (APP) or to the APP adjusted for sagittal pelvic tilt (PT). The optimal plain radiographic method for the postoperative assessment of anteversion is not agreed upon.

Questions/Purposes

(1) Do anteversion measurements on plain radiographs correlate more with APP anteversion or PT-adjusted anteversion? (2) Do measurements of anteversion performed on supine anteroposterior (AP) radiographs more accurately reflect intraoperative anteversion values for navigated THA compared to anteversion measured on cross-table lateral (CL) radiographs?

Methods

Seventy patients receiving primary navigated THA were included. APP and PT-adjusted anteversion were recorded; the latter defined the intraoperative target for anteversion. Postoperative anteversion was measured on supine AP pelvis radiographs with computer software and CL radiographs with conventional methods. Intraoperative measurements were used as the reference standards for comparisons.

Results

Mean intraoperative APP anteversion was 20.6° ± 5.6°. Mean intraoperative PT-adjusted anteversion was 22.9° ± 4.5°. Mean anteversion was 22.7° ± 4.7° on AP radiographs and 27.2° ± 4.2° on CL radiographs (p < 0.001). Only correlations between PT-adjusted anteversion and radiographic assessments of anteversion were significant. The mean difference between PT-adjusted anteversion and anteversion on AP radiographs was −0.2° ± 4.3°, while the mean difference between the PT-adjusted anteversion and anteversion measured on CL radiographs was 4.3 ± 5.1° (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Plain film assessment of anteversion was more accurate on supine AP radiographs than on CL radiographs, which overestimated acetabular anteversion.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Arai N, Nakamura S, Matsushita T. Difference between 2 measurement methods of version angles of the acetabular component. J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22(5): 715-720.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Barrack RL. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: implant design and orientation. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2003; 11(2): 89-99.PubMed
3.
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(6): 762-769.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Blondel B, Parratte S, Tropiano P, Pauly V, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN. Pelvic tilt measurement before and after total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009; 95(8): 568-572.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Ghelman B, Kepler CK, Lyman S, Della Valle AG. CT outperforms radiography for determination of acetabular cup version after THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 467(9): 2362-2370.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
6.
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(2): 164-172.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Haaker RG, Tiedjen K, Ottersbach A, Rubenthaler F, Stockheim M, Stiehl JB. Comparison of conventional versus computer-navigated acetabular component insertion. J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22(2): 151-159.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hassan DM, Johnston GH, Dust WN, Watson LG, Cassidy D. Radiographic calculation of anteversion in acetabular prostheses. J Arthroplasty. 1995; 10(3): 369-372.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Kalteis T, Handel M, Herold T, Perlick L, Baethis H, Grifka J. Greater accuracy in positioning of the acetabular cup by using an image-free navigation system. Int Orthop. 2005; 29(5): 272-276.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
10.
Krismer M, Bauer R, Tschupik J, Mayrhofer P. EBRA: a method to measure migration of acetabular components. J Biomech. 1995; 28(10): 1225-1236.CrossRefPubMed
11.
12.
Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, et al. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978; 60: 217.PubMed
13.
Lu M, Zhou YX, Du H, Zhang J, Liu J. Reliability and validity of measuring acetabular component orientation by plain anteroposterior radiographs. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471(9): 2987-2994.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
14.
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(3): 387-391.CrossRefPubMed
15.
McArthur B, Cross M, Geatrakas C, Mayman D, Ghelman B. Measuring acetabular component version after THA: CT or plain radiograph? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 470(10): 2810-2818.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
16.
McLawhorn AS, Sculco PK, Weeks KD, Nam D, Mayman DJ. Targeting a New Safe Zone: A Step in the Development of Patient-Specific Component Positioning for Total Hip Arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2015; 44(6): 270-276.
17.
Murray DW. The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993; 75: 228-232.PubMed
18.
Nho JH, Lee YK, Kim HJ, Ha YC, Suh YS, Koo KH. Reliability and validity of measuring version of the acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012; 94(1): 32-36.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Nishino H, Nakamura S, Arai N, Matsushita T. Accuracy and precision of version angle measurements of the acetabular component after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013; 28(9): 1644-1647.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Nogler M, Kessler O, Prassl A, et al. Reduced variability of acetabular cup positioning with use of an imageless navigation system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 426(426): 159-163.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Pulos N, Tiberi JV 3rd, Schmalzried TP. Measuring acetabular component position on lateral radiographs: ischio-lateral method. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2011; 69(Suppl 1): S84-S89.PubMed
22.
Ryan JA, Jamali AA, Bargar WL. Accuracy of computer navigation for acetabular component placement in THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468(1): 169-177.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
23.
Sendtner E, Schuster T, Worner M, Kalteis T, Grifka J, Renkawitz T. Accuracy of acetabular cup placement in computer-assisted, minimally-invasive THR in a lateral decubitus position. Int Orthop. 2011; 35(6): 809-815.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
24.
Snyder GM, Lozano Calderon SA, Lucas PA, Russinoff S. Accuracy of computer-navigated total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012; 27(3): 415-420.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Steppacher SD, Tannast M, Zheng G, et al. Validation of a new method for determination of cup orientation in THA. J Orthop Res. 2009; 27(12): 1583-1588.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Tiberi JV, Pulos N, Kertzner M, Schmalzried TP. A more reliable method to assess acetabular component position. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 470(2): 471-476.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
27.
Wan Z, Boutary M, Dorr LD. The influence of acetabular component position on wear in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008; 23(1): 51-56.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Woo RY, Morrey BF. Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64(9): 1295-1306.PubMed
29.
Metadata
Title
Anteroposterior Radiographs Are More Accurate than Cross-Table Lateral Radiographs for Acetabular Anteversion Assessment: a Retrospective Cohort Study
Authors
Peter K. Sculco, MD
Alexander S. McLawhorn, MD, MBA
Kaitlin M. Carroll, BS
Benjamin A. McArthur, MD
David J. Mayman, MD
Publication date
01-02-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
HSS Journal ® / Issue 1/2016
Print ISSN: 1556-3316
Electronic ISSN: 1556-3324
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11420-015-9472-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

HSS Journal ® 1/2016 Go to the issue

Editorial

A Potential Crack in our Experience with Bisphosphonate Therapy

Case Report

The Distribution of Ochronosis in Osteoarthritic Articular Cartilage in a Knee

Original Article

Useful Functional Outcome Can Be Achieved After Motor Nerve Transfers in Management of the Paralytic Hand. An Observational Study

Original Article

Maintenance of Derotation in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: a Novel Technique Measuring Postoperative Vertebral Rotation by Pedicle Screw Position

Commentary

Bisphosphonate Drug Holiday? Celebrate?

Original Article

Initial Surgical Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fracture Predicts Difficulty Healing when Humeral Shaft Nonunion Occurs