Cargando…

Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: Minimal invasive surgery (MIS) has gained growing popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA) but concerns exist regarding component malpositioning. The aim of the present study was to evaluate femoral and acetabular component positioning in primary cementless THA comparing a lateral to a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Innmann, Moritz M., Streit, Marcus R., Kolb, Jeanette, Heiland, Jochen, Parsch, Dominik, Aldinger, Peter R., Königshausen, Matthias, Gotterbarm, Tobias, Merle, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4523950/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26242180
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0623-1
_version_ 1782384142093123584
author Innmann, Moritz M.
Streit, Marcus R.
Kolb, Jeanette
Heiland, Jochen
Parsch, Dominik
Aldinger, Peter R.
Königshausen, Matthias
Gotterbarm, Tobias
Merle, Christian
author_facet Innmann, Moritz M.
Streit, Marcus R.
Kolb, Jeanette
Heiland, Jochen
Parsch, Dominik
Aldinger, Peter R.
Königshausen, Matthias
Gotterbarm, Tobias
Merle, Christian
author_sort Innmann, Moritz M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Minimal invasive surgery (MIS) has gained growing popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA) but concerns exist regarding component malpositioning. The aim of the present study was to evaluate femoral and acetabular component positioning in primary cementless THA comparing a lateral to a MIS anterolateral approach. METHODS: We evaluated 6 week postoperative radiographs of 52 hips with a minimal invasive anterolateral approach compared to 54 hips with a standard lateral approach. All hips had received the same type of implant for primary cementless unilateral THA and had a healthy hip contralaterally. RESULTS: Hip offset was equally restored comparing both approaches. No influence of the approach was observed with regard to reconstruction of acetabular offset, femoral offset, vertical placement of the center of rotation, stem alignment and leg length discrepancy. However, with the MIS approach, a significantly higher percentage of cups (38.5 %) was malpositioned compared to the standard approach (16.7 %) (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The MIS anterolateral approach allows for comparable reconstruction of stem position, offset and center of rotation compared to the lateral approach. However, surgeons must be aware of a higher risk of cup malpositioning for inclination and anteversion using the MIS anterolateral approach.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4523950
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45239502015-08-05 Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty Innmann, Moritz M. Streit, Marcus R. Kolb, Jeanette Heiland, Jochen Parsch, Dominik Aldinger, Peter R. Königshausen, Matthias Gotterbarm, Tobias Merle, Christian BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Minimal invasive surgery (MIS) has gained growing popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA) but concerns exist regarding component malpositioning. The aim of the present study was to evaluate femoral and acetabular component positioning in primary cementless THA comparing a lateral to a MIS anterolateral approach. METHODS: We evaluated 6 week postoperative radiographs of 52 hips with a minimal invasive anterolateral approach compared to 54 hips with a standard lateral approach. All hips had received the same type of implant for primary cementless unilateral THA and had a healthy hip contralaterally. RESULTS: Hip offset was equally restored comparing both approaches. No influence of the approach was observed with regard to reconstruction of acetabular offset, femoral offset, vertical placement of the center of rotation, stem alignment and leg length discrepancy. However, with the MIS approach, a significantly higher percentage of cups (38.5 %) was malpositioned compared to the standard approach (16.7 %) (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The MIS anterolateral approach allows for comparable reconstruction of stem position, offset and center of rotation compared to the lateral approach. However, surgeons must be aware of a higher risk of cup malpositioning for inclination and anteversion using the MIS anterolateral approach. BioMed Central 2015-08-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4523950/ /pubmed/26242180 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0623-1 Text en © Innmann et al. 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Innmann, Moritz M.
Streit, Marcus R.
Kolb, Jeanette
Heiland, Jochen
Parsch, Dominik
Aldinger, Peter R.
Königshausen, Matthias
Gotterbarm, Tobias
Merle, Christian
Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty
title Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty
title_full Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty
title_fullStr Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty
title_full_unstemmed Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty
title_short Influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty
title_sort influence of surgical approach on component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4523950/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26242180
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0623-1
work_keys_str_mv AT innmannmoritzm influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT streitmarcusr influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT kolbjeanette influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT heilandjochen influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT parschdominik influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT aldingerpeterr influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT konigshausenmatthias influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT gotterbarmtobias influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty
AT merlechristian influenceofsurgicalapproachoncomponentpositioninginprimarytotalhiparthroplasty