Innmann MM, Hasberg S, Waldstein W, Grammatopoulos G, Gill HS, Pegg EC, Aldinger PR, Merle C. Are there clinically relevant anatomical differences of the proximal femur in patients with mild dysplastic and primary hip osteoarthritis? A CT-based matched-pairs cohort study.
Clin Radiol 2019;
74:896.e17-896.e22. [PMID:
31466797 DOI:
10.1016/j.crad.2019.06.032]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2018] [Accepted: 06/10/2019] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
AIM
To investigate the three-dimensional anatomy and shape of the proximal femur, comparing patients with secondary osteoarthritis (OA) due to mild developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and primary hip OA.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This retrospective radiographic computed tomography (CT)-based study investigated proximal femoral anatomy in a consecutive series of 84 patients with secondary hip OA due to mild DDH (Crowe type I&II/Hartofilakidis A) compared to 84 patients with primary hip OA, matched for gender, age at surgery, and body mass index.
RESULTS
Men with DDH showed higher neck shaft angles (127±5° vs. 123±4°; p<0.001), whereas women with DDH had a larger femoral head diameter (46±4 vs. 44±3 mm; p=0.002), smaller femoral offset (36±5 vs. 40±4 mm; p<0.001), decreased leg torsion (25±13° vs. 31±16°; p=0.037), and a higher neck shaft angle (128±7° vs. 123±4°; p<0.001) compared to primary OA patients. Similar patterns of the three-dimensional endosteal canal shape of the proximal femur, but a high inter-individual variability for femoral canal torsion at the meta-diaphyseal level were found for DDH and primary OA patients.
CONCLUSION
Standard cementless stem designs are suitable to treat patients with secondary hip OA due to mild DDH; however, high patient variability and subtle anatomical differences in the proximal femur should be respected.
Collapse