Top

Published in:

01-04-2015 | Original Paper

Optimal anterior femoral offset for functional range of motion in total hip arthroplasty—a computer simulation study

Authors: Masanobu Hirata, Yasuharu Nakashima, Daisuke Hara, Masayuki Kanazawa, Yusuke Kohno, Kensei Yoshimoto, Yukihide Iwamoto

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 4/2015

Abstract

Purpose

Compared to medial femoral offset (MFO), the role of anterior femoral offset (AFO) on range of motion (ROM) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been fully examined. We therefore defined AFO as the anterior distance from the centre of the femoral head to the proximal femoral axis in the sagittal plane and determined the optimal AFO required for ROM needed for activities of daily living using a computer-simulated THA model.

Methods

Various AFOs were obtained by changing stem anteversion (stem-AV) and stem tilt in the sagittal plane (stem-tilt) using a CT-based simulation software. The required ROM was defined as: flexion ≥ 110°, internal rotation at 90° flexion (IR) ≥ 30°, external rotation (ER) ≥ 30°, and extension ≥ 30°, and we determined AFO and MFO to satisfy required ROM.

Results

AFO was positively correlated with stem-AV and anterior stem-tilt. MFO was negatively correlated with stem-AV and not influenced by stem-tilt. Flexion and IR increased with both increased AFO and MFO, whereas extension and ER decreased with increased AFO. A smoothing spline curve showed the optimal AFO and MFO for required ROM to be from 15 mm to 25 mm on average and more than 32.1 mm, respectively.

Conclusions

This is the first study to show that AFO directly influenced ROM in THA. Optimal AFO as well as MFO should be reconstructed to achieve sufficient ROM.

Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmerman JR (1978) Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60(2):217–220PubMed

Jolles BM, Zangger P, Leyvraz PF (2002) Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multivariate analysis. J Arthroplasty 17(3):282–288CrossRefPubMed

Widmer KH, Zurfluh B (2004) Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion. J Orthop Res 22(4):815–821CrossRefPubMed

Malik A, Maheshwari A, Dorr LD (2007) Impingement with total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(8):1832–1842CrossRefPubMed

McGrory BJ, Morrey BF, Cahalan TD, An KN, Cabanela ME (1995) Effect of femoral offset on range of motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 77(6):865–869

Matsushita A, Nakashima Y, Jingushi S, Yamamoto T, Kuraoka A, Iwamoto Y (2009) Effects of the femoral offset and the head size on the safe range of motion in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24(4):646–651CrossRefPubMed

Lakshmanan P, Ahmed SM, Hansford SM, Hansford RG, Woodnutt DJ (2008) Achieving the required medial offset and limb length in total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg 74(1):49–53PubMed

Lincoln M, Johnston K, Muldoon M, Santore R (2009) Combined arthroscopic and modified open approach for cam femoroacetabular impingement: a preliminary experience. Arthroscopy 25(4):392–399CrossRefPubMed

Girard J, Krantz N, Bocquet D, Wavreille G, Migaud H (2012) Femoral head to neck offset after hip resurfacing is critical for range of motion. Clin Biomech 27(2):165–169CrossRef

10.

Shoji T, Yasunaga Y, Yamasaki T, Mori R, Hamanishi M, Ochi M (2013) Bony impingement depends on the bone morphology of the hip after total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 37(10):1897–1903CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

11.

Iwai S, Kabata T, Maeda T, Kajino Y, Watanabe S, Kuroda K, Fujita K, Hasegawa K, Tsuchiya H (2014) Three-dimensional kinetic simulation before and after rotational acetabular osteotomy. J Orthop Sci 19(3):443–450CrossRefPubMed

12.

Murray DW (1993) The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 75(2):228–232

13.

Bargar WL, Jamali AA, Nejad AH (2010) Femoral anteversion in THA and its lack of correlation with native acetabular anteversion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(2):527–532CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

14.

Müller M, Crucius D, Perka C, Tohtz S (2011) The association between the sagittal femoral stem alignment and the resulting femoral head centre in total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 35(7):981–987CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

15.

Hirata M, Nakashima Y, Ohishi M, Hamai S, Hara D, Iwamoto Y (2013) Surgeon error in performing intraoperative estimation of stem anteversion in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 28(9):1648–1653CrossRefPubMed

16.

Nakashima Y, Sato T, Yamamoto T, Motomura G, Ohishi M, Hamai S, Akiyama M, Hirata M, Hara D, Iwamoto Y (2013) Results at a minimum of 10 years of follow-up for AMS and PerFix HA-coated cementless total hip arthroplasty: impact of cross-linked polyethylene on implant longevity. J Orthop Sci 18(6):962–968CrossRefPubMed

17.

Nadzadi ME, Pedersen DR, Yack HJ, Callaghan JJ, Brown TD (2003) Kinematics, kinetics, and finite element analysis of commonplace maneuvers at risk for total hip dislocation. J Biomech 36(4):577–591CrossRefPubMed

18.

Hemmerich A, Brown H, Smith S, Marthandam SS, Wyss UP (2006) Hip, knee, and ankle kinematics of high range of motion activities of daily living. J Orthop Res 24(4):770–781CrossRefPubMed

19.

Sugano N, Tsuda K, Miki H, Takao M, Suzuki N, Nakamura N (2012) Dynamic measurements of hip movement in deep bending activities after total hip arthroplasty using a 4-dimentional motion analysis system. J Arthroplasty 27(8):1562–1568CrossRefPubMed

20.

Kessler O, Patil S, Wirth S, Mayr E, Colwell CW Jr, D’Lima DD (2008) Bony impingement affects range of motion after total hip arthroplasty: A subject-specific approach. J Orthop Res 26(4):443–452CrossRefPubMed

21.

Cinotti G, Lucioli N, Malagoli A, Calderoli C, Cassese F (2011) Do large femoral heads reduce the risks of impingement in total hip arthroplasty with optimal and non-optimal cup positioning? Int Orthop 35(3):317–323CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

22.

Tannast M, Kubiak-Langer M, Langlotz F, Puls M, Murphy SB, Siebenrock KA (2007) Noninvasive three-dimensional assessment of femoroacetabular impingement. J Orthop Res 25(1):122–131CrossRefPubMed

23.

Preininger B, Schmorl K, von Roth P, Winkler T, Matziolis G, Perka C, Tohtz S (2012) Femoral offset (3D) in patients without osteoarthritis - index values from 200 hip joints. Open Orthop J 6:578–581CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

24.

Pasquier G, Ducharne G, Ali ES, Giraud F, Mouttet A, Durante E (2010) Total hip arthroplasty offset measurement: is CT scan the most accurate option? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96(4):367–375CrossRefPubMed

Title: Optimal anterior femoral offset for functional range of motion in total hip arthroplasty—a computer simulation study
Authors: Masanobu Hirata
Yasuharu Nakashima
Daisuke Hara
Masayuki Kanazawa
Yusuke Kohno
Kensei Yoshimoto
Yukihide Iwamoto
Publication date: 01-04-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: International Orthopaedics / Issue 4/2015
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2538-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Optimal anterior femoral offset for functional range of motion in total hip arthroplasty—a computer simulation study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2015

Subsequent contralateral hip fractures: can at-risk patients be identified? An observational study of 5,102 patients

Large fixed-size metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: higher serum metal ion levels in patients with pain

A nationwide analysis of risk factors for in-hospital myocardial infarction after total joint arthroplasty

Is the acetabular cup orientation after total hip arthroplasty on a two-dimensional or three-dimensional model accurate?

Dynamic locking screw improves fixation strength in osteoporotic bone: an in vitro study on an artificial bone model

Acetabular defect reconstruction in revision hip arthroplasty with a modular revision system and biological defect augmentation