Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Hip-TEP | Research

Reconstruction of the anatomy of the hip in total hip arthroplasty with two different kinds of stems

Authors: Bernd Fink, Mohamed Morgan, Philipp Schuster

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The reconstruction of the individual anatomy is important in total hip replacement. The aim of the study was to compare two different kinds of stems with respect to the reconstruction of the individual anatomy of the hip.

Methods

We compared the restoration of the anatomical parameters (horizontal and vertical offset, femoral neck-shaft angle (NSA) and leg length) of 100 unilateral CoreHip (CH) implantations with 100 unilateral implantations of a standard anatomical stem (Exception (E)). The CoreHip has three different NSAs and exhibits a constant femoral neck length for the different sizes. The Exception stem has a standard and lateralized version with two different NSAs and, in both versions, the femoral neck length increases proportionately with size. The anatomical parameters of the operated and healthy sides were measured and the differences between the two stems compared.

Results

The horizontal (2.5 ± 2.8 mm (mean ± SD) for CH vs. 5.4 ± 4.1 mm for E, p < 0.001) and vertical offset (4.1 ± 3.5 mm for CH vs. 5.0 ± 3.8 mm, p = 0.024) and femoral neck-shaft-angle (1.7 ± 1.6 degrees for CH vs. 5.6 ± 3.4 degrees for E, p < 0.001) could be reconstructed significantly better with the CoreHip system. There was a tendency for the leg length (4.0 ± 3.9 mm for CH vs. 4.5 ± 3.8 mm; p = 0.11) to be better restored with the CoreHip.

Conclusion

The reconstruction of the individual anatomy of the hip with an endoprosthesis could be realized significantly better with the stem that was designed with three different femoral neck-shaft angles and a constant femoral neck length over different sizes.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet. 2007;370:1508–19.CrossRef Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet. 2007;370:1508–19.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Forster-Horvath C, Egloff C, Valderrabano V, Nowakowski AM. The painful primary hip replacement - review of the literature. Swiss Med Wkly. 2014;144:w13974.PubMed Forster-Horvath C, Egloff C, Valderrabano V, Nowakowski AM. The painful primary hip replacement - review of the literature. Swiss Med Wkly. 2014;144:w13974.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Wylde V, Hewlett S, Learmonth ID, Dieppe P. Persistent pain after joint replacement: prevalence, sensory qualities, and postoperative determinants. Pain. 2011;152:566–72.CrossRef Wylde V, Hewlett S, Learmonth ID, Dieppe P. Persistent pain after joint replacement: prevalence, sensory qualities, and postoperative determinants. Pain. 2011;152:566–72.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Fink B, Lass R. Diagnostic algorithm for failure analysis of painful hip arthoplasties. Z Orthop Unfall. 2016;154(5):527–44.CrossRef Fink B, Lass R. Diagnostic algorithm for failure analysis of painful hip arthoplasties. Z Orthop Unfall. 2016;154(5):527–44.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Charles MN, Bourne RB, Davey JR, Greenwald AS, Morrey BF, Rorabeck CH. Soft-tissue balancing of the hip: the role of femoral offset restoration. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A:1078–88.CrossRef Charles MN, Bourne RB, Davey JR, Greenwald AS, Morrey BF, Rorabeck CH. Soft-tissue balancing of the hip: the role of femoral offset restoration. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A:1078–88.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Mahfouz MR. US patent app 15/323, 926,2017 and US patent app 16/397, 576, 2019. Mahfouz MR. US patent app 15/323, 926,2017 and US patent app 16/397, 576, 2019.
7.
go back to reference Rawal BR, Ribeiro R, Malhotra R, Bhatnagar N. Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population. Indian J Orthop. 2012;46:46–53.CrossRef Rawal BR, Ribeiro R, Malhotra R, Bhatnagar N. Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population. Indian J Orthop. 2012;46:46–53.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P. Femoral neck-shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. J Anat. 2013;223:133–51.CrossRef Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P. Femoral neck-shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. J Anat. 2013;223:133–51.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Soodmand E, Zheng G, Steens W, Bader R, Nolte L, Kluess D. Surgically relevant morphological parameters of the proximal human femur: a statistical analysis based on 3D reconstruction of CT data. Orthop Surg. 2019;11:135–42.CrossRef Soodmand E, Zheng G, Steens W, Bader R, Nolte L, Kluess D. Surgically relevant morphological parameters of the proximal human femur: a statistical analysis based on 3D reconstruction of CT data. Orthop Surg. 2019;11:135–42.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Adekoya-Cole TO, Akinmokun OI, Soyebi KO, Oguche OE. Femoral neck shaft angles: a radiological anthropometry study. Nig Postgr Med J. 2016;23:17–20.CrossRef Adekoya-Cole TO, Akinmokun OI, Soyebi KO, Oguche OE. Femoral neck shaft angles: a radiological anthropometry study. Nig Postgr Med J. 2016;23:17–20.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Tang ZH, Yeoh CSN, Tan GMJ. Radiographic study of the proximal femur morphology of elderly patients with femoral neck fractures: is there a difference among ethnic groups? Singap Med J. 2017;58:717–20.CrossRef Tang ZH, Yeoh CSN, Tan GMJ. Radiographic study of the proximal femur morphology of elderly patients with femoral neck fractures: is there a difference among ethnic groups? Singap Med J. 2017;58:717–20.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Pi Y, Zhao Y, Wang W, He Z, Mao X. Measurement of proximal femoral morphology and analysis of 500 cases in Hunan province. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2013;38:925–30.PubMed Pi Y, Zhao Y, Wang W, He Z, Mao X. Measurement of proximal femoral morphology and analysis of 500 cases in Hunan province. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2013;38:925–30.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. Predicting the position of the femoral head center. J Arthroplast. 1999;14:102–7.CrossRef Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. Predicting the position of the femoral head center. J Arthroplast. 1999;14:102–7.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Hartzband M. Kinectiv ML Taper. Hip and Knee Symposium 2007. Rush University medical center/Searle learning center. Chicago, IL. Hartzband M. Kinectiv ML Taper. Hip and Knee Symposium 2007. Rush University medical center/Searle learning center. Chicago, IL.
15.
go back to reference Yanagimoto, Sakamaki T. Basic study of hip prosthesis design: Analysis of shape of femoral medullary canal in Japanese subjects by computed tomtographic scanning. In: ImuraS, Akamatsu A, Azuma H, Sawqi K, Taneka S (Eds.) Hip Biomechnics, Springer Verlag Tokyo 1993, ISBN: 13:978-4-431-68239-4, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-68237-0, page 289-302. Yanagimoto, Sakamaki T. Basic study of hip prosthesis design: Analysis of shape of femoral medullary canal in Japanese subjects by computed tomtographic scanning. In: ImuraS, Akamatsu A, Azuma H, Sawqi K, Taneka S (Eds.) Hip Biomechnics, Springer Verlag Tokyo 1993, ISBN: 13:978-4-431-68239-4, https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-4-431-68237-0, page 289-302.
16.
go back to reference Lv L, Meng G, Gong H, Zhu D, Zhu W. A new method for the measurement and analysis of three-dimensional morphological parameters of proximal male femur. Biomed Res. 2012;23:219–26. Lv L, Meng G, Gong H, Zhu D, Zhu W. A new method for the measurement and analysis of three-dimensional morphological parameters of proximal male femur. Biomed Res. 2012;23:219–26.
17.
go back to reference Boymans TA, Heyligers IC, Grimm B. The morphology of the proximal femoral canal continues to change in the very elderly: impliytions for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2015;30:2328–32.CrossRef Boymans TA, Heyligers IC, Grimm B. The morphology of the proximal femoral canal continues to change in the very elderly: impliytions for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2015;30:2328–32.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference von Roth P, Perka C, Mayr HO, Preininger B, Ziebula F, Matziolis G, Hube R. Reproducibility of femoral offset following short stem and straight stem total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2014;37:e678–84. von Roth P, Perka C, Mayr HO, Preininger B, Ziebula F, Matziolis G, Hube R. Reproducibility of femoral offset following short stem and straight stem total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2014;37:e678–84.
19.
go back to reference Batailler C, Fary C, Servien E, Lustig S. Influence of femoral broach shape on stem alignment using anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: a radiologic comparative study of 3 different stems. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0204591.CrossRef Batailler C, Fary C, Servien E, Lustig S. Influence of femoral broach shape on stem alignment using anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: a radiologic comparative study of 3 different stems. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0204591.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Erivan R, Muller AS, Villatte G, Millerioux S, Mulliez A, Boisgard S, et al. Short stems reproduce femoral offset better than standard stems in total hip arthroplasty: a case-control study. Int Orthop. 2020;44:45–51.CrossRef Erivan R, Muller AS, Villatte G, Millerioux S, Mulliez A, Boisgard S, et al. Short stems reproduce femoral offset better than standard stems in total hip arthroplasty: a case-control study. Int Orthop. 2020;44:45–51.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Duwelius PJ, Hartzband MA, Burkhart R, Carnahan C, Blair S, Wu Y, et al. Clinical results of a modular neck hip system: hitting the “bull’s-eye” more accurately. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2010;39(Suppl10):2–6. Duwelius PJ, Hartzband MA, Burkhart R, Carnahan C, Blair S, Wu Y, et al. Clinical results of a modular neck hip system: hitting the “bull’s-eye” more accurately. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2010;39(Suppl10):2–6.
22.
go back to reference Van Drongelen S, Kaldowski H, Tarhan T, Assi A, Meurer A, Stief F. Are changes in radiological leg alignment and femoral parameters after total hip replacement responsible for joint loading during gait? BMC Musculoskeletal Dis. 2019;20:256.CrossRef Van Drongelen S, Kaldowski H, Tarhan T, Assi A, Meurer A, Stief F. Are changes in radiological leg alignment and femoral parameters after total hip replacement responsible for joint loading during gait? BMC Musculoskeletal Dis. 2019;20:256.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Asayma I, Naito M, Fujisawa M, Kambe T. Relationship tetween radiographic measurements of reconstructed hip joint position and the Trendelenburg sign. J Arthroplast. 2002;17:747–51.CrossRef Asayma I, Naito M, Fujisawa M, Kambe T. Relationship tetween radiographic measurements of reconstructed hip joint position and the Trendelenburg sign. J Arthroplast. 2002;17:747–51.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Fackler CD, Poss R. Dislocation in total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop. 1980;151:169–78. Fackler CD, Poss R. Dislocation in total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop. 1980;151:169–78.
25.
go back to reference Sakalkale PD, Sharkey PF, Eng K, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH. Effect of femoral component offest on polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;\:125-134.CrossRef Sakalkale PD, Sharkey PF, Eng K, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH. Effect of femoral component offest on polyethylene wear in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;\:125-134.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Little NJ, Busch CA, Gallagher JA, Rorabeck CH, Bourne BB. Acetabular polyehtylene wear and acetabular inclination and femoral offset. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2895–900.CrossRef Little NJ, Busch CA, Gallagher JA, Rorabeck CH, Bourne BB. Acetabular polyehtylene wear and acetabular inclination and femoral offset. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2895–900.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference De Fine M, Romagnoli M, Toscano A, Bondi A, Nani M, Zaffagnini S. Is there a role for femoral offset reconstraction during total hip arthroplasty? A systemic review. Orthop Traumatol. 2017;103:349–55. De Fine M, Romagnoli M, Toscano A, Bondi A, Nani M, Zaffagnini S. Is there a role for femoral offset reconstraction during total hip arthroplasty? A systemic review. Orthop Traumatol. 2017;103:349–55.
28.
go back to reference Frieberg O. Clinical symptoms and biomechanics of lumbar spine and hip joint in leg length inequality. Spine. 1983;8:643–51.CrossRef Frieberg O. Clinical symptoms and biomechanics of lumbar spine and hip joint in leg length inequality. Spine. 1983;8:643–51.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Mihalko WM, Philips MJ, Krackow KA. Acute sciatic and femoral neuritis following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A:589–92.CrossRef Mihalko WM, Philips MJ, Krackow KA. Acute sciatic and femoral neuritis following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A:589–92.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference 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.CrossRef 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.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Woo RYG, Morrey BF. Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64:1295–306.CrossRef Woo RYG, Morrey BF. Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64:1295–306.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Amstutz AM, Jinnah RH, Mail L. Revision of aseptic losse total hip arthorplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;170:21–33.CrossRef Amstutz AM, Jinnah RH, Mail L. Revision of aseptic losse total hip arthorplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;170:21–33.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Rolser J, Perka C. The effect of anatomical relationships on kinetic parameters after total hip replacement. Int Orthop. 2000;24:23–7.CrossRef Rolser J, Perka C. The effect of anatomical relationships on kinetic parameters after total hip replacement. Int Orthop. 2000;24:23–7.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Ranawat CS. The pants too short, the leg too long! Orthopaedics. 1999;22:845–6.CrossRef Ranawat CS. The pants too short, the leg too long! Orthopaedics. 1999;22:845–6.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Hofmann AA, Skrzynski MC. Leg length inequality and nerve palsy in total hip arthroplasty: a lawyer awaits! Orthopaeics. 2000;23:943–4.CrossRef Hofmann AA, Skrzynski MC. Leg length inequality and nerve palsy in total hip arthroplasty: a lawyer awaits! Orthopaeics. 2000;23:943–4.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Maloney WJ, Keeney JA. Leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2004;19:108–10.CrossRef Maloney WJ, Keeney JA. Leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2004;19:108–10.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Plaass C, Clauss M, Ochsner PE, Ilchmann T. Influence of leg length discrepancy on clinical results after total hip arthroplasty – a pospective clinical trial. Hio Int. 2011;21:441–9. Plaass C, Clauss M, Ochsner PE, Ilchmann T. Influence of leg length discrepancy on clinical results after total hip arthroplasty – a pospective clinical trial. Hio Int. 2011;21:441–9.
Metadata
Title
Reconstruction of the anatomy of the hip in total hip arthroplasty with two different kinds of stems
Authors
Bernd Fink
Mohamed Morgan
Philipp Schuster
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keywords
Hip-TEP
Hip-TEP
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05152-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2022 Go to the issue