Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Orthopaedics 1/2007

01-08-2007 | Review

Containment versus impingement: finding a compromise for cup placement in total hip arthroplasty

Author: K.-H. Widmer

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Special Issue 1/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Recommendations for cup containment and impingement may provide conflicting directions for component orientation in total hip arthroplasty. For optimal containment, the cup is positioned with respect to the acetabular bone, resulting in coincidence of the rim of the cup and the acetabulum. This results in good coverage and symmetric load transfer, leading to good long-term stability, but occasionally necessitates more abduction of the cup than that recommended by the safe zone. On the other hand, placement of the cup for an optimal range of motion would lead to only partial containment, with a higher risk of component loosening and revision. The most effective compromise is to use a prosthesis that has a large safe zone, realised by a high head-to-neck ratio, and orienting the cup such that a good containment is achieved and the safe zone is respected. Computer navigation or smart aiming devices may help to find the best relative orientation.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Elke R, Marugg S (1992) Transmission of force to the trabecular structures of the proximal end of the femur (in German). Orthopäde 21:51–56PubMed Elke R, Marugg S (1992) Transmission of force to the trabecular structures of the proximal end of the femur (in German). Orthopäde 21:51–56PubMed
2.
go back to reference Laursen JO, Petersen B, Mossing NB (1998) The Richards Series 2 total hip prosthesis: a 13-year study and radiographic evaluation. Orthopedics 21:277–282PubMed Laursen JO, Petersen B, Mossing NB (1998) The Richards Series 2 total hip prosthesis: a 13-year study and radiographic evaluation. Orthopedics 21:277–282PubMed
3.
go back to reference Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmermann JR (1978) Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60(2):217–220PubMed Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmermann JR (1978) Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60(2):217–220PubMed
4.
go back to reference Morscher EW (1992) Current status of acetabular fixation in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 274:172–193PubMed Morscher EW (1992) Current status of acetabular fixation in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 274:172–193PubMed
5.
go back to reference Massin P, Geais L, Astoin E, Simondi M, Lavaste F (2000) The anatomic basis for the concept of lateralized femoral stems: a frontal plane radiographic study of the proximal femur. J Arthroplasty 15:93–101PubMedCrossRef Massin P, Geais L, Astoin E, Simondi M, Lavaste F (2000) The anatomic basis for the concept of lateralized femoral stems: a frontal plane radiographic study of the proximal femur. J Arthroplasty 15:93–101PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS (1988) The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop Relat Res 235:148–165PubMed Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS (1988) The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop Relat Res 235:148–165PubMed
7.
go back to reference Ranawat CS, Maynard MJ (1991) Modern techniques of cemented total hip arthroplasty. Techniques Orthoped 6:17–25CrossRef Ranawat CS, Maynard MJ (1991) Modern techniques of cemented total hip arthroplasty. Techniques Orthoped 6:17–25CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Sarmiento A, Ebramzadeh E, Gogan WJ, McKellop HA (1990) Cup containment and orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72:996–1002PubMed Sarmiento A, Ebramzadeh E, Gogan WJ, McKellop HA (1990) Cup containment and orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72:996–1002PubMed
9.
go back to reference Schidlo C, Becker C, Jansson V, Refior J (1999) Change in the CCD angle and the femoral anteversion angle by hip prosthesis implantation (in German). Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 137:259–264PubMedCrossRef Schidlo C, Becker C, Jansson V, Refior J (1999) Change in the CCD angle and the femoral anteversion angle by hip prosthesis implantation (in German). Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 137:259–264PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Shirazi-Adl A, Dammak M, Paiement G (1997) Experimental determination of friction characteristics at the trabecular bone/porous-coated metal interface in cementless implants. J Biomed Mater Res 27:167–175CrossRef Shirazi-Adl A, Dammak M, Paiement G (1997) Experimental determination of friction characteristics at the trabecular bone/porous-coated metal interface in cementless implants. J Biomed Mater Res 27:167–175CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Widmer K-H, Zurfluh B (2004) Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion. J Orthop Res 22:815–821PubMedCrossRef Widmer K-H, Zurfluh B (2004) Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion. J Orthop Res 22:815–821PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Widmer K-H, Majewski M (2005) The impact of the CCD-angle on range of motion and cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Biomech 20:723–728CrossRef Widmer K-H, Majewski M (2005) The impact of the CCD-angle on range of motion and cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Biomech 20:723–728CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Widmer K-H, Zurfluh B, Morscher EW (1997) Contact surface and pressure load at implant–bone interface in press-fit cups compared to natural hip joints (in German). Orthopäde 26:181–189PubMed Widmer K-H, Zurfluh B, Morscher EW (1997) Contact surface and pressure load at implant–bone interface in press-fit cups compared to natural hip joints (in German). Orthopäde 26:181–189PubMed
14.
go back to reference Widmer K-H, Zurfluh B, Morscher EW (2002) Load transfer and fixation mode of press-fit acetabular sockets. J Arthroplasty 17:926–935PubMedCrossRef Widmer K-H, Zurfluh B, Morscher EW (2002) Load transfer and fixation mode of press-fit acetabular sockets. J Arthroplasty 17:926–935PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Yoshimine F (2006) The safe-zones for combined cup and neck anteversions that fulfill the essential range of motion and their optimum combination in total hip replacements. J Biomech 39:1315–1323PubMedCrossRef Yoshimine F (2006) The safe-zones for combined cup and neck anteversions that fulfill the essential range of motion and their optimum combination in total hip replacements. J Biomech 39:1315–1323PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Containment versus impingement: finding a compromise for cup placement in total hip arthroplasty
Author
K.-H. Widmer
Publication date
01-08-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue Special Issue 1/2007
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-007-0429-3

Other articles of this Special Issue 1/2007

International Orthopaedics 1/2007 Go to the issue