Does It Matter: Total Hip Arthroplasty or Lumbar Spinal Fusion First? Preoperative Sagittal Spinopelvic Measurements Guide Patient-Specific Surgical Strategies in Patients Requiring Both

Spinopelvic alignment and precise cup placement in total hip arthroplasty - A systematic review

Study Design

A systematic literature review and meta- analysis.

Objective

To extract and combine the available literature focused on normal and abnormal biomechanical principles of spine-pelvis-hip complex and to sum up the data in the application of THA both in the setting with and without spinal disorders.

Methods

An extensive search and analysis of the articles was done by 3 authors independently in 7 platforms based on PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Selection criteria 1. Articles that assessed spinopelvic parameters (SS, SPT, PI, and acetabular cup orientation) in patients undergoing THA, Articles that assessed balance in spinopelvic complex after THA, Randomized control studies, Systematic literature reviews, Meta-analyses, Clinical trials / original research studies, Review articles and Articles after 2015 were included. Cochrane's GRADE method was used to define the level of evidence. 2.Participants: Patients who underwent THA only (in asymptomatic spine), those who had ankylosing spondylitis and underwent THA and those who underwent THA with prior spinal arthrodesis. 3.Study parameters: Ante Inclination (AI), sacral slope (SS), pelvic Incidence (PI) and spinopelvic tilt (SPT) in both positions of standing and sitting. ΔAI, ΔSS and ΔSPT. Data were collected and analyzed, the means of the study parameters with SD were calculated and a meta-analysis is performed to evaluate the pooled means with optimal value range.

Results

From 218 abstracts extracted and after eligibility assessment and exclusion, 4 articles involving 439 patients were enrolled. The mean SS in standing and sitting calculated were 35.53±10.52 and 33.13±12.38. The mean of AI and SPT in standing /sitting positions are 29.7±12.29/34.69±12.96 (n = 242) and 19.56±8.9/21.22±12.53 (n=439) respectively. The ΔAI, ΔSS, and ΔSPT were 4.99,2.4 and 1.66 respectively.

Conclusion

There is a proportionate change between the spinopelvic tilt and the acetabular orientation in postural variations. Evaluation of spine, pelvis and hip becomes more critical in identifying these changes and thereby prompting the acetabular cup position in the functional safe zone.

Previous lumbar spine fusion increases the risk of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty in patients with hip-spine syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With life expectancy on the rise, there has been an increase in patients with concomitant degenerative hip and spine pathology, defined as hip-spine syndrome (HSS). Patients affected by HSS may require both total hip arthroplasty (THA) and lumbar spinal fusion (LSF), although there is a paucity of data regarding how the sequential timing of these procedures may influence clinical outcomes. This study aims to compare complications and spinopelvic parameters in patients with HSS who underwent either LSF first or THA first.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and Scopus was conducted for randomized and nonrandomized studies investigating complications and spinopelvic parameters in patients with HSS who had undergone THA and LSF. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool was utilized to assess the risk of bias in included studies. Relevant outcomes were pooled for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included in this study. There was a significantly higher THA dislocation rate in patients who had undergone LSF first compared to those who had THA first (OR: 3.17, 95% CI 1.23-8.15, P = 0.02). No significant difference was found in terms of THA aseptic loosening (OR: 0.86; 95% CI 0.32-2.32, p = 0.77) and revision rate (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.53-2.62) between these two groups. Individuals who received THA only showed a significantly lower risk of hip dislocation (OR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.08-0.25, P < 0.00001) and THA revision (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.14-0.36, P < 0.00001) compared to patients with a previous LSF.

CONCLUSIONS

In HSS patients who underwent both LSF and THA, those who received LSF first displayed an increased risk of hip dislocation after subsequent THA. Additionally, the relative risks of dislocation and revision rate appeared significantly lower in patients who had undergone THA only when compared to THA patients with a history of previous LSF. Due to the impact of LSF on spinopelvic biomechanics, caution must be exercised when performing THA in individuals with instrumented spines.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42023412447.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

LL.

Surgical Management of Hip-Spine Syndrome: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Hip-spine syndrome (HSS) was first described in 1983 to describe the symptomatology resulting from concomitant lumbar degenerative stenosis and hip osteoarthritis. Numerous studies have sought to understand the underlying pathology and appropriate management of this syndrome. The purpose of this article is to review the literature for the specific imaging characteristics and the optimal surgical treatment of HSS.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted via an electronic database search through PubMed to identify all publications related to HSS. All publications that contained data on patients who underwent surgical treatment for HSS and reported patient-reported outcome measures or radiographic data were included. Exclusion criteria consisted of publications in a language other than English, review articles, and technique articles.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles that focused on the surgical management of HSS were identified. Of these 15 articles, 8 reported radiographic outcomes, with most reporting no significant change in spinopelvic parameters before and after surgery. Thirteen articles reported clinical outcomes, with 8 of those 13 articles identifying patient-reported outcome measures to be significantly improved following surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The data on the surgical management of HSS remains sparse. While there is some evidence that total hip arthroplasty in patients who previously underwent spinal fusion may have higher complication rates, there remains debate regarding which surgical problem to address first, the hip or the spine.

Hip Osteoarthritis in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Severe Adult Spinal Deformity: Prevalence and Impact on Spine Surgery Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is common in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Limited data exist on the prevalence of hip OA in patients with ASD, or on its impact on baseline and postoperative alignment and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Therefore, this paper will assess the prevalence and impact of hip OA on alignment and PROMs.

METHODS

Patients with ASD who underwent L1-pelvis or longer fusions were included. Two independent reviewers graded hip OA with the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification and stratified it by severity into non-severe (KL grade 1 or 2) and severe (KL grade 3 or 4). Radiographic parameters and PROMs were compared among 3 patient groups: Hip-Spine (hip KL grade 3 or 4 bilaterally), Unilateral (UL)-Hip (hip KL grade 3 or 4 unilaterally), or Spine (hip KL grade 1 or 2 bilaterally).

RESULTS

Of 520 patients with ASD who met inclusion criteria for an OA prevalence analysis, 34% (177 of 520) had severe bilateral hip OA and unilateral or bilateral hip arthroplasty had been performed in 8.7% (45 of 520). A subset of 165 patients had all data components and were examined: 68 Hip-Spine, 32 UL-Hip, and 65 Spine. Hip-Spine patients were older (67.9 ± 9.5 years, versus 59.6 ± 10.1 years for Spine and 65.8 ± 7.5 years for UL-Hip; p < 0.001) and had a higher frailty index (4.3 ± 2.6, versus 2.7 ± 2.0 for UL-Hip and 2.9 ± 2.0 for Spine; p < 0.001). At 1 year, the groups had similar lumbar lordosis, yet the Hip-Spine patients had a worse sagittal vertebral axis (SVA) measurement (45.9 ± 45.5 mm, versus 25.1 ± 37.1 mm for UL-Hip and 19.0 ± 39.3 mm for Spine; p = 0.001). Hip-Spine patients also had worse Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Summary scores at baseline (25.7 ± 9.3, versus 28.7 ± 9.8 for UL-Hip and 31.3 ± 10.5 for Spine; p = 0.005) and 1 year postoperatively (34.5 ± 11.4, versus 40.3 ± 10.4 for UL-Hip and 40.1 ± 10.9 for Spine; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

This study of operatively treated ASD revealed that 1 in 3 patients had severe hip OA bilaterally. Such patients with severe bilateral hip OA had worse baseline SVA and PROMs that persisted 1 year following ASD surgery, despite correction of lordosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Superior outcomes of total hip arthroplasty without prior lumbar arthrodesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The number of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery after previous lumbar arthrodesis (LA) is rising. Literature suggests that LA may significantly impact pelvic biomechanics and potentially compromise the success of prosthetic hip replacement. This study aims to evaluate complication rates, dislocation rates, and revision rates in patients with prior LA undergoing THA surgery compared to those undergoing THA surgery without prior LA.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A PICOS template was developed to ensure a structured approach. The search for relevant studies was performed across five databases, including Pubmed, Scopus, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane. The selected articles were evaluated based on the Levels of Evidence (LoE) criteria. The Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS) was employed to analyze the retrospective studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis were registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). For the outcomes that allowed for a meta-analysis performed using R software, a p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The final analysis included seventeen studies comprising a total of 3,139,164 cases of THA. Among these cases, 3,081,137 underwent THA surgery alone, while 58,027 patients underwent THA with a previous LA. The study investigated various factors, including dislocation rates, revision rates, and complication, as well as the surgical approach and type of implant used, for both the THA-only group and the group of patients who underwent THA with prior LA. The analysis revealed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) for all variables studied, favoring the group of patients who underwent THA alone without prior LA.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated a statistically significant superiority in all analyzed outcomes for patients who underwent THA-only without prior LA. Specifically, patients with isolated THA implants experienced significantly lower incidences of THA dislocation, wound complications, periprosthetic joint infection, revision, and mechanical complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Is Timing of Total Hip Arthroplasty and Lumbar Spine Fusion Associated With Risk of Hip Dislocation?

Background

In patients with concomitant hip and lumbar spine disease, the question of which surgery-total hip arthroplasty (THA) or lumbar spine fusion (LSF)-to address first has not been adequately answered. We aimed to evaluate the risk of dislocation after THA in patients with LSF first or after THA.

Methods

Retrospective review utilizing the PearlDiver database querying Current Procedural Terminology codes for LSF in the year prior (LSF first) or in the year after primary or revision THA (THA first). International Classification of Disease codes identified postoperative hip dislocation as our primary outcome variable. Demographic data collected included age, sex, and obesity. Dislocation rates were described as a proportion of the cohort and compared with chi-square tests.

Results

We identified 280,857 primary THA and 42,314 revision THA cases from 2012-2019. Of these, 2090 underwent primary THA and LSF, and 283 underwent revision THA and LSF within a year of each procedure. No differences in age, sex, or obesity between groups were noted. No difference in rate of all-time dislocation for primary THA was noted for the LSF first 51/1429 (3.6%) compared to the THA first 30/661 (4.0%) groups (P = .34), or for revision THA with LSF first 48/204 (23.5%) compared to THA first 27/117 (23.1%) groups (P = 1.0).

Conclusions

There was no difference in the risk of dislocation after primary or revision THA if LSF occurred prior to or after the THA. These findings can help surgeons as they counsel patients with concomitant lumbar spine and hip degeneration.

Patients Who Have Had Three or More Levels Fused During Lumbar Spinal Fusion Have Worse Functional Outcomes After Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are commonly performed in patients who have concomitant spine and hip pathology. While patients who have three or more levels fused during LSF have increased postoperative opioid consumption after undergoing THA, it is unknown whether the number of levels fused during LSF affects THA functional outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary academic center for patients who underwent LSF first and then had a primary THA performed with a minimum of one-year follow-up for the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (HOOS-JR). Operative notes were reviewed to determine the number of levels fused during LSF. There were 105 patients who underwent one-level LSF, 55 patients underwent two-level LSF, and 48 patients underwent three-or-more-level LSF. No significant differences existed in age, race, body mass index, and comorbidities between the cohorts.

RESULTS

While preoperative HOOS-JR was similar among the three cohorts, patients who had three-or-more-level LSF had significantly lower HOOS-JR scores than patients who had two-level or one-level LSF (71.4 versus 82.4 versus 78.2; P = .010) and a lower delta HOOS-JR (27.2 versus 39.4 versus 35.9; P = .014). Patients who had three-or-more-level LSF had a significantly lower rate of achieving minimal clinically important difference (61.7% versus 87.2% versus 78.7%; P = .011) and the patient acceptable symptom state (37.5% versus 69.1% versus 59.0%; P = .004) for the HOOS-JR, compared to patients who had two-level or one-level LSF, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons should counsel patients who have had three-or-more-level LSF that they may have a lower rate of hip function improvement and symptom acceptability after THA, compared to patients who have had a less number of levels fused during LSF.

Risk of Dislocation and Revision Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients With Prior Lumbar Fusion With Spinopelvic Fixation

BACKGROUND

The effect of spinopelvic fixation in addition to lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) on dislocation/instability and revision in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been reported previously.

METHODS

The PearlDiver Research Program was used to identify patients aged 30 and above undergoing primary THA who received (1) THA only, (2) THA with prior single-level LSF, (3) THA with prior 2-5 level LSF, or (4) THA with prior LSF with spinopelvic fixation. The incidence of THA revision and dislocation/instability was compared through logistic regression and Chi-squared analysis. All regressions were controlled for age, gender, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI).

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2018, 465,558 patients without history of LSF undergoing THA were examined and compared to 180 THA patients with prior spinopelvic fixation, 5,299 with prior single-level LSF, and 1,465 with prior 2-5 level LSF. At 2 years, 7.8% of THA patients with prior spinopelvic fixation, 4.7% of THA patients with prior 2-5 level LSF, 4.2% of THA patients with prior single-level LSF, and 2.2% of THA patients undergoing only THA had a dislocation event or instability (P < .0001). After controlling for length of fusion, pelvic fixation itself was associated with higher independent risk of revision (at 2 years: 2-5 level LSF + spinopelvic fixation: aHR = 3.15, 95% CI 1.77-5.61, P < .0001 vs 2-5 level LSF with no spinopelvic fixation: aOR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.10-1.76, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

At 2 years, spinopelvic fixation in THA patients were associated with a greater than 3.5-fold increase in hip dislocation risk compared to those without LSF, and an over 2-fold increase in THA revision risk compared to those with LSF without spinopelvic fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Does fusion length matter? Total hip arthroplasty dislocation after extension of lumbosacral fusion: a case report

CASE

Hip-spine syndrome is a complex challenge for orthopedic surgeons. We present a 60-year-old female with a history of spinal fusion and total hip arthroplasty. The patient underwent extension of the previous fusion with sacropelvic fixation, and 5 months later she presented with left posterior prosthetic hip dislocation which required sedation and closed reduction.

CONCLUSION

Even with no change in lumbar lordosis or pelvic tilt and adequate acetabular cup position, extension of the fusion construct may predispose patients to dislocation. This may be the result of an increased lever arm acting at the hip joint, thereby leading to instability.

Spinopelvic Relationship and Its Impact on Total Hip Arthroplasty

The dynamic, complex interaction among the spine, pelvis, and hip is often underappreciated, yet understanding it is vital for both arthroplasty and spinal surgeons. There is an increasing incidence of degenerative hip and spinal pathologies as a result of the ageing population. Furthermore, hip pathology can cause spine pathology and vice versa through “hip-spine” and “spine-hip syndrome.” Consequently, total hip arthroplasty (THA) and spinal fusion surgery, which both affect spinopelvic mobility, are also on the rise. Alteration in spinopelvic motion can affect the orientation of the acetabulum and, therefore, implant positioning in THA, leading to complications such as dislocation, impingement, aseptic loosening, and wear of components. This makes it imperative to assess spinopelvic motion and pelvic tilt prior to patients undergoing THA. In this paper, we explore how the surgeon should proceed to reduce risk of component malalignment, as well as the role of navigation systems in acetabular cup positioning.

Association between sagittal spinal alignment and mechanical complications after primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review

Objective

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) affects pelvic posture and spinal alignment. These postural changes may further predispose patients to mechanical complications (MCs) after THA. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to investigate whether any high-quality studies have assessed the association between sagittal spinal alignment and MCs after primary THA.

Methods

Inclusion criteria for studies were adult patients (age ≥18 years), primary THA, pre- and postoperative spinopelvic standing sagittal radiographs acquired preoperatively and at a minimum of 6-month follow-up, measurements of spinopelvic parameters, and reporting of possible MCs after THA. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.

Results

Six articles met the inclusion criteria. Although several studies confirmed the importance of spinal alignment when planning THA, these mainly investigated pelvic mobility as a risk factor for THA dislocation. Radiological follow-up imaging practices varied, and studies focused on different individual spinopelvic parameters.

Conclusion

Based on our study findings, no conclusions can be drawn regarding the association between sagittal spinal alignment and MCs after primary THA. Further research is needed to improve our knowledge of the connection between MCs after THA and sagittal spinal alignment.

Current Evidence for Spinopelvic Characteristics Influencing Total Hip Arthroplasty Dislocation Risk

BACKGROUND

Decreased pelvic mobility and pelvic retroversion may result from spinal degeneration and lead to changes in the orientation of the acetabular implant after total hip arthroplasty (THA). While multiple patient and surgery-related factors contribute to THA dislocations, there is increasing evidence that sagittal spinopelvic dynamics are relevant for THA stability. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the relationship between previously described sagittal spinopelvic characteristics and implant dislocations after primary THA.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search in the PubMed and Embase databases was conducted for studies reporting on spinopelvic morphology, alignment, pathology, or surgery and THA dislocations. Risk of bias was assessed using the MINORS criteria. Because of high heterogeneity in study methodology, a synthesis of best evidence was performed. Odds ratios (ORs), relative risks (RRs), and effect sizes (g) were calculated.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (1,007,900 THAs) with quality scores of 15 to 23 out of 24 were included. Nine different spinopelvic alignment parameters (8 studies, g = 0.14 to 2.02), spinal pathology (2 studies, OR = 1.9 to 29.2), and previous spinal fusion surgery (8 studies, OR = 1.59 to 23.7, RR = 3.0) were found to be related to THA dislocation. Conflicting results were found for another sagittal pelvic morphology parameter, pelvic incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Several sagittal spinopelvic patient characteristics were found to be related to THA dislocation, and the associated risks were greater than for other patient and surgery-related factors. Future research is needed to determine which of those characteristics and parameters should be taken into account in patients undergoing primary THA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Stability in Direct Lateral vs Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Context of Lumbar Spinal Fusion

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) may increase the risk of dislocation in patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA), especially when the LSF was done before the THA. Most publications evaluated patients who had undergone THA using a posterior approach to the hip, yet there are little data on the influence of other surgical approaches. The goal of this study was to evaluate the risk of THA dislocation with anterior supine-based surgical approaches to the hip in patients who have undergone surgical management of concurrent hip and spine pathology.

METHODS

Patients older than 18 years who underwent an LSF and THA using a supine approach-either direct anterior (DA) or direct lateral (DL)-between 2000 and 2018 were identified. Only standard bearings (28-32-36-40 mm) were used. The dislocation rate was determined in this cohort. A subsequent analysis was conducted, stratifying patients based on the order in which they received the LSF or THA.

RESULTS

A total of 582 surgical hip-spine patients were retrospectively identified and included in the cohort. Of total, 332 patients (57.0%) received an LSF before the THA; 250 (43.0%) had the fusion after a primary hip replacement. There were 143 patients (24.6%) in the DA group and 439 (75.4%) in the DL group. Overall, there were five dislocations (0.9%) in the entire cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with simultaneous degenerative hip and lumbar spine pathology, anterior supine-based approaches demonstrate a low (<1%) risk of instability. Given the small number of total dislocation events (n = 5), additional analysis is warranted to assess the effect of different anterior approaches (DA versus DL) or timing of lumbar spinal surgery (before or after THA).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Spinopelvic alignment and low back pain after total hip arthroplasty: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Spinopelvic alignment is increasingly considered as an essential factor for maintaining an energy-efficient posture in individuals with normal or pathological status. Although several previous studies have shown that changes in the sagittal spinopelvic alignment may occur in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA), no review of this area has been completed so far. Thus, the objective of this scoping review was to summarize the evidence investigating changes in spinopelvic alignment and low back pain (LBP) following THA.

DATA SOURCES

We adhered to the established methodology for scoping reviews. Four electronic databases were systematically searched from inception-December 31, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

We selected prospective or retrospective observational or intervention studies that included patients with THA.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extraction and levels of evidence were independently performed using standardized checklists.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 45 papers were included in this scoping review, involving 5185 participants with THA. Pelvic tilt was the most common parameter measured in the eligible studies (n = 26). The results were not consistent across all studies; however, it was demonstrated that the distribution of pelvic tilt following THA had a range of 25° posterior to 20° anterior. Moreover, decreased sacral slope and lower pelvic incidence were associated with increased risk of dislocation in patients with THA. Lumbar spine scoliosis did not change significantly after THA in patients with bilateral hip osteoarthritis (5.50°(1.16°) vs. 3.73°(1.16°); P-value = 0.29). Finally, one study indicated that LBP improvement was not correlated with postoperative changes in spinopelvic alignment parameters. Several methodological issues were addressed in this study, including no sample size calculation and no type-I error adjustment for outcome multiplicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in spinopelvic alignment may occur after THA and may improve with time. Patients with a THA dislocation usually show abnormal spinopelvic alignment compared to patients without a THA dislocation. LBP usually improves markedly over time following THA.

Timing of Total Hip Arthroplasty Affects Lumbar Spinal Fusion Outcomes

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) within the PearlDiver Humana research database from 2010 to 2018.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine if timing of total hip arthroplasty (THA) affects LSF outcomes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In patients with both spine and hip pathology, outcomes of THA have been shown to be affected by the timing of THA relative to LSF. However, few studies have assessed postoperative outcomes following LSF in this clinical scenario.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A national database was queried for patients undergoing lumbar fusion and divided into 4 groups: (1) those who underwent LSF without THA (No THA); (2) those who underwent THA at least 2 years before LSF (>2 Prior THA); (3) those who underwent THA in the 2 years before LSF (0-2 Prior THA); and (4) those who underwent THA after LSF (THA After). We assessed lumbar-specific outcomes, including pseudarthrosis, revision, mechanical failure, and adjacent segment disease (ASD); as well as systemic complications. Controlling for age, sex, and Charlson comorbidity index, complication rates between all groups were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. Post hoc comparisons were performed using the Fisher exact test with Bonferroni correction to account for multiple pairwise comparisons, resulting in an adjusted threshold for statistical significance of P<0.007.

RESULTS

When compared with the no THA group, those in the THA After group had a higher rate of ASD on multivariate analysis [adjusted odds ratio: 1.53, 95% confidence interval: 1.20-1.94, P<0.001]. When compared with all patients who underwent THA before LSF, patients who underwent THA after LSF had an increased risk of ASD (adjusted odds ratio: 3.80, 95% confidence interval: 2.21-6.98, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who undergo THA after LSF have an increased rate of lumbar-related complications both when compared with patients who do not undergo THA and when compared with patients who undergo THA before LSF.

Does timing of lumbar fusion affect dislocation rate after total hip arthroplasty?

Introduction

The impact of lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) on pelvic mobility and increased risk for THA dislocation are recognized. However, there is still controversy on whether THA should be performed prior or following LSF. This study aims to compare the rates of hip dislocation in patients undergoing THA prior to or following LSF.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 109 primary THA and LSF. There were 34 men and 75 women with a mean age of 66.9. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: 1) THA prior to lumbar fusion (n = 42) and 2) THA following lumbar fusion (n = 67). Radiographic parameters including acetabular component abduction, anteversion, pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope, standing lumbar lordosis (LL) and PI-LL mismatch were determined for each patient. The surgical approach and THA parameters were also recorded and compared between the 2 groups. Patients with fracture, malignant disease, and prior hip hardware were excluded.

Results

The mean follow up was 14.7 months. Overall, 8 patients (7.3%) had a postoperative hip dislocation (0 in group 1 (0%), and 8 in group 2 (11.9%) (p = 0.022). The mean cup abduction and anteversion in patients that dislocated was 37.7° and 23.4° respectively while patients who did not dislocate had an average cup abduction of 37.6° (p = 0.970) and anteversion of 25.9° (p = 0.367). Patients who dislocated had decreased lumbar lordosis (p = 0.022) and higher PI-LL mismatch (p = 0.0004) compared to that did not dislocate. There were no other significant differences in the spinopelvic parameters between the 2 groups. Neither surgical approach nor dual mobility articulations use had a significant impact on postoperative dislocations.

Conclusion

Higher rates of hip dislocation were observed in patients undergoing primary THA following LSF. Dislocators had decreased lumbar lordosis and increased PI-LL mismatch. Patients who require both spinal fusion and THA should undergo hip arthroplasty first to minimize the risk of postoperative instability.

No linear correlation between pelvic incidence and acetabular orientation: Retrospective observational study

Links between sagittal spinal alignment and acetabular orientation attract considerable research attention with the goal of understanding “hip-spine syndrome.” However, whether pelvic incidence (PI) is related to acetabular orientation remains debatable. The purpose of the present study was to determine: 1. whether the correlation between PI and acetabular orientation is present in pelvises of young healthy adults, and 2. whether the correlation is present in subgroups of sex, or between the left and right pelvis. We analyzed 100 abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) scans of skeletally healthy young adults. We measured PI and acetabular orientation with three-dimensional (3D) measurements. The orientation of 200 acetabula was measured using 3D reconstructed models of 100 pelvises in the coordinate system based on the anterior pelvic plane (APP). To quantify the acetabular orientation, the radiographic definitions of anteversion and inclination were used. To examine the correlation between acetabular orientation and PI, Pearson's correlation was used. The mean PI was 46.9° ± 10.2°, and the mean acetabular orientation 15.3° ± 5.7° anteverted and 37.5° ± 3.9° inclined. While no significant difference in the PI was observed, the average acetabular orientation of female pelvises (anteversion, 17.5° ± 5.6°; inclination, 36.7° ± 3.7°) was more anteverted and less inclined compared to that of male pelvises (anteversion, 13.2° ± 4.9°; inclination, 38.3° ± 3.9°, respectively; P values < .05). The correlation between PI and acetabular orientation was statistically not significant. After division of study group by sex, the linear correlation between PI and acetabular orientation was not statistically supported. The asymmetry of the acetabular orientation between the left and right sides was not significant. The linear relationship between anatomical acetabular orientation and PI was not evident in the normal population. Our finding thus proves the absence of a linear relationship between the upper and lower articular orientation of the pelvic segment and deepens the understanding of the characteristics of acetabular orientation and PI.

Comparable dislocation and revision rates for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with subsequent or prior lumbar spinal fusion: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a known correlation between the procedures of lumbar spinal fusion (LSF), total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the complication of hip dislocation and revision occurring in patients. However there is no consensus as to whether the risk of this complication is higher if THA is performed before or after LSF. This meta-analysis aims to determine the influence of surgical sequence of lumbar spinal fusion and total hip arthroplasty on the rates of hip dislocation and revisions.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was conducted with a multi-database search (PubMed, OVID, EMBASE, Medline) according to PRISMA guidelines on 27th May 2020. Data from all published literature meeting inclusion criteria were extracted and analyzed with an inverse variance statistical model.

FINDINGS

A total of 25,558 subsequent LSF and 43,880 prior LSF THA patients were included in this study. There was no statistically significant difference in all-cause revisions (OR = 0.86, 95%CI: 0.48-1.54, p = 0.61), dislocation (OR = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.25-2.72, p = 0.75) or aseptic loosening (OR = 1.14, 95%CI: 0.94-1.38, p = 0.17) when comparing patients receiving LSF subsequent versus prior to THA.

CONCLUSION

Lumbar spinal fusion remains a risk factor for dislocation and revision of total hip arthroplasties regardless of whether it is performed prior to or after THA. Further preoperative assessment and altered surgical technique may be required in patients having THA who have previously undergone or are likely to undergo LSF in the future.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

Level II, Meta-analysis of homogeneous studies.

Pelvic motion the key to understanding spine-hip interaction

Pelvic motion acting as a hinge between the spine and hips is essential to maintain proper balance during bipedalism. Pelvic rotation is recruited as a compensation mechanism when spinal malalignment occurs.This pelvic rotation can affect functional acetabular orientation, and consequently functional cup positioning if a total hip arthroplasty (THA) is needed. Pelvic retroversion, frequently associated with degenerative spinal changes, implies an increase of acetabular version.Patients with flexible lumbar spines (spine users) protect the hip joint. Patients with stiff, degenerated or fused lumbar spines (hip users) demand higher hip mobility, placing the THA at risk.Pelvises in retroversion place the THA at risk for anterior dislocation when standing. In contrast, pelvises in anteversion or with low pelvic incidence (PI) can place THA at risk for posterior dislocation when sitting.Try to set the cup in an anatomic position. However, bear in mind that low PI pelvises may need more acetabular ante-inclination, and high PI pelvises more acetabular retroversion.If surgery is needed, start first by addressing the hip, except in patients with compensation (high pelvic retroversion), who may need spine surgery first to place the pelvis, and consequently the acetabulum, in a proper position. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:522-533. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.200032.

The severity of developmental dysplasia of the hip does not correlate with the abnormality in pelvic incidence

Background

The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between the severity of Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and the abnormality in pelvic incidence (PI).

Methods

This was a retrospective study analyzing 53 DDH patients and 53 non-DDH age-matched controls. Computed tomography images were used to construct three-dimensional pelvic model. The Crowe classification was used to classify the severity of DDH. The midpoint of the femoral head centers and sacral endplates were projected to the sagittal plane of the pelvis. The PI was defined as the angle between a line perpendicular to the sacral plate at its midpoint and a line connecting this point to the axis of the femoral heads. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare the differences between the PI of DDH group and the non-DDH controls group. Kendall’s coefficient of concordance was used to determine the correlation between the severity of DDH and PI.

Results

Patients with DDH had a significantly (p = 0.041) higher PI than the non-DDH controls (DDH 47.6 ± 8.2°, normal 44.2 ± 8.8°). Crowe type I patients had a significantly (p = 0.038) higher PI (48.2 ± 7.6°) than the non-DDH controls. No significant difference between the PI in Crowe type II or III patients and the PI in non-DDH controls were found (Crowe type II, 50.2 ± 9.6°, p = 0.073; Crowe type III, 43.8 ± 7.2°, p = 0.930). No correlation was found between the severity of DDH and the PI (r = 0.091, p = 0.222).

Conclusions

No correlation was found between the severity of DDH and the PI. The study confirmed that the PI in DDH (Crowe type I) group was higher than that of the non-DDH control group, while the PI does not correlate with the severity of DDH.