Top

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Published in:

01-11-2010 | Basic Research

Use of Morphometry to Quantify Osteolysis after Total Hip Arthroplasty

Authors: Lindsay K. Smith, MSc, MCSP, Fiona Cramp, PhD, MCSP, Shea Palmer, PhD, MCSP, Nikki Coghill, PhD, Robert F. Spencer, MD, FRCS

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 11/2010

Abstract

Background

Progressive osteolysis threatens the longevity of hip arthroplasties and radiographic review is recommended. Measurement of osteolytic lesions in a clinical setting has not been achieved easily in the past. Other radiologic investigations provide accurate information but cost and risk to the patient prohibit their use in routine review.

Questions/purposes

We developed a simple, reliable tool to be used in hip arthroplasty review to quantify osteolytic changes seen on plain film radiographs.

Methods

A morphometric grid was developed and tested on simulated and actual osteolytic lesions. Four health professionals measured lesions on each of two occasions. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for interobserver and intraobserver reliabilities were calculated and Bland-Altman plots were constructed for graphic analysis.

Results

The ICCs for interobserver reliability on the simulated and actual osteolytic lesions were in the range 0.90 to 0.96. The values for intraobserver (test-retest) reliability were 0.97 to 0.98. The Bland-Altman plots confirmed agreement and in each case, proximity of the mean to zero indicated no significant bias.

Conclusions

The data show a morphometric grid is reliable for measuring osteolytic changes after hip arthroplasty.

Clinical Relevance

This tool has potential to improve monitoring processes for hip arthroplasty and to be useful in future research studies. Additional work is needed to test for validity and clinical importance of the measurements obtained.

Available only for authorised users

Barrack RL, Folgueras A, Munn B, Tvetden D, Sharkey P. Pelvic lysis and polyethylene wear at 5–8 years in an uncemented total hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;335:211–217.PubMed

Bland MJ, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–310.PubMed

Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:128–133.CrossRefPubMed

British Orthopaedic Association. Primary total hip replacement: a guide to good practice. 2006. Available at: http://boa.ac.uk. Accessed October 7, 2009.

Claus AM, Engh CA Jr, Sychterz CJ, Xenos JS, Orishimo KF, Engh CA Sr. Radiographic definition of pelvic osteolysis following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:1519–1526.PubMed

Dall DM, Learmonth ID, Solomon M. A scoring system to determine radiological loosening in cemented total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 1992;16:339–343.CrossRefPubMed

Della Valle CJ, Paprosky WG. The femur in revision total hip arthroplasty evaluation and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:55–62.CrossRefPubMed

Duffy PJ, Masri BA, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP. Evaluation of patients with pain following total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2566–2575.PubMed

Dumbleton JH, Manley MT, Edidin AA. A literature review of the association between wear rate and osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:649–661.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Elias H, Hennig A, Schwartz DE. Stereology: applications to biomedical research. Physiol Rev. 1971;51:158–200.PubMed

11.

Eliasziw M, Young SL, Woodbury MG, Fryday-Field K. Statistical methodology for the concurrent assessment of interrater and intrarater reliability: using goniometric measurements as an example. Phys Ther. 1994;74:777–788.PubMed

12.

Geerdink CH, Grimm B, Vencken W, Heyligers IC, Tonino AJ. Cross-linked compared with historical polyethylene in THA: an 8-year clinical study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:979–984.CrossRefPubMed

13.

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;467:2362–2370.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Gosvig KK, Jacobsen S, Palm H, Sonne-Holm S, Magnusson E. A new radiological index for assessing asphericity of the femoral head in cam impingement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:1309–1316.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Han CD, Choe WS, Yoo JH. Effect of polyethylene wear on osteolysis in cementless primary total hip arthroplasty: minimal 5-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14:714–723.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Harris WH. Conquest of a worldwide human disease: particle-induced periprosthetic osteolysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:39–42.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Hernigou P, Zilber S, Filippini P, Poignard A. Ceramic-ceramic bearing decreases osteolysis: a 20-year study versus ceramic-polyethylene on the contralateral hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2274–2280.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Holt G, Murnaghan C, Reilly J, Meek RM. The biology of aseptic osteolysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;460:240–252.PubMed

19.

Hozack WJ, Mesa JJ, Carey C, Rothman RH. Relationship between polyethylene wear, pelvic osteolysis, and clinical symptomatology in patients with cementless acetabular components: a framework for decision making. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11:769–772.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Jacobs CA, Christensen CP, Greenwald AS, McKellop H. Clinical performance of highly cross-linked polyethylenes in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:2779–2786.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Karanicolas PJ, Bhandari M, Kreder H, Moroni A, Richardson M, Walter SD, Norman GR, Guyatt GH; Collaboration for Outcome Assessment in Surgical Trials (COAST) Musculoskeletal Group. Evaluating agreement: conducting a reliability study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(suppl 3):99–106.

22.

Kitamura N, Pappedemos PC, Duffy PR III, Stepniewski AS, Hopper RH Jr, Engh CA Jr, Engh CA. The value of anteroposterior pelvic radiographs for evaluating pelvic osteolysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;453:239–245.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Lavernia CJ. Cost-effectiveness of early surgical intervention in silent osteolysis. J Arthroplasty 1998;13:277–279.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Matthews JB, Besong AA, Green TR, Stone MH, Wroblewski BM, Fisher J, Ingham E. Evaluation of the response of primary human peripheral blood mononuclear phagocytes to challenge with in vitro generated clinically relevant UHMWPE particles of known size and dose. J Biomed Mater Res. 2000;52:296–307.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Morris RW. Assessing the reliability of clinical measurement. In: Pynsent PB, Fairbank JCT, Carr AJ, eds. Assessment Methodology in Orthopaedics. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1997:1–18.

26.

National Joint Registry. 6th Annual report. 2009. National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Available at: http://www.njrcentre.org.uk. Accessed October 7, 2009.

27.

Needham J, Burns T, Gerlinger T. Catastrophic failure of ceramic-polyethylene bearing total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:627–630.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Nixon M, Taylor G, Sheldon P, Iqbal SJ, Harper W. Does bone quality predict loosening of cemented total hip replacements? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:1303–1308.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Paterson D. The International Documentation and Evaluation System (IDES). Orthopedics. 1993;16:11–14.PubMed

30.

Peat JK, Mellis C, Williams K, Xuan W. Health Science Research: A Handbook of Quantitative Methods. London, UK: Sage Publications; 2002.

31.

Prevrhal S, Klifa CS, Shepherd JA, Ries MD, Genant HK. Computer-assisted technique to delineate osteolytic lesions around the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:833–838.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Pynsent PB, Fairbank JCT, Carr AJ. Outcome Measures in Orthopaedics and Orthopaedic Trauma. Ed 2. London, UK: Arnold; 2004.

33.

Rankin G, Stokes M. Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: an illustration of appropriate statistical analyses. Clin Rehabil. 1998;12:187–199.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Roder C, Eggli S, Aebi M, Busato A. The validity of clinical examination in the diagnosis of loosening of components in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85:37–44.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Saleh KJ, Holtzman J, Gafni A, Saleh L, Davis A, Resig S, Gross AE. Reliability and intraoperative validity of preoperative assessment of standardized plain radiographs in predicting bone loss at revision hip surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1040–1046.PubMed

36.

Sim J, Wright C. Research in Health Care: Concepts, Designs and Methods. Cheltenham, UK: Nelson Thornes; 2000.

37.

Stamenkov R, Howie D, Taylor J, Findlay D, McGee M, Kourlis G, Carbone A, Burwell M. Measurement of bone defects adjacent to acetabular components of hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;412:117–124.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Ed 3. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2003.

39.

Stulberg SD, Wixson RL, Adams AD, Hendrix RW, Bernfield JB. Monitoring pelvic osteolysis following total hip replacement surgery: an algorithm for surveillance. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(suppl 2):116–122.PubMed

40.

Thomas A, Epstein NJ, Stevens K, Goodman SB. Utility of Judet oblique x-rays in preoperative assessment of acetabular periprosthetic osteolysis: a preliminary study. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2007;36:E107–E110.

41.

Walde TA, Weiland DE, Leung SB, Kitamura N, Sychterz CJ, Engh CA Jr, Claus AM, Potter HG, Engh CA Sr. Comparison of CT, MRI, and radiographs in assessing pelvic osteolysis: a cadaveric study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;437:138–144.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Wright JG, Feinstein AR. Improving the reliability of orthopaedic measurements. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74:287–291.PubMed

43.

Wroblewski BM, Siney PD, Fleming PA. Charnley low-friction arthroplasty: survival patterns to 38 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:1015–1018.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Use of Morphometry to Quantify Osteolysis after Total Hip Arthroplasty
Authors: Lindsay K. Smith, MSc, MCSP
Fiona Cramp, PhD, MCSP
Shea Palmer, PhD, MCSP
Nikki Coghill, PhD
Robert F. Spencer, MD, FRCS
Publication date: 01-11-2010
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 11/2010
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1377-6

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Use of Morphometry to Quantify Osteolysis after Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract

Background

Questions/purposes

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical Relevance

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Questions/purposes

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical Relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2010

In Brief: Statistics in Brief: Confidence Intervals: What is the Real Result in the Target Population?

Cemented Endoprosthetic Reconstruction of the Proximal Tibia: How Long Do They Last?

Letter to the Editor: Posterior Malleolar Stabilization of Syndesmotic Injuries is Equivalent to Screw Fixation

Surgical Management of 121 Benign Proximal Fibula Tumors

Analysis of Nondiagnostic Results after Image-guided Needle Biopsies of Musculoskeletal Lesions

Site-dependent Replacement or Internal Fixation for Postradiation Femur Fractures After Soft Tissue Sarcoma Resection