The Current Proposed Total Hip Arthroplasty Surgical Planning Guidelines Based on Classification of Spine Stiffness May be Flawed Due to Incorrect Assumptions

Abstract

BackgroundThe available classifications and preoperative planning tools for total hip arthroplasty assume that: 1) there is no variation in the sagittal pelvic tilt (SPT) if the radiographs are repeated, and 2) there is no significant change in the postoperative SPT postoperatively. We hypothesized that there would be significant differences in postoperative SPT tilt as measured by the sacral slope, thus rendering the current classifications and tools flawed. MethodsThis study was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of preoperative and postoperative (1.5-6 months) full-body imaging of 237 primary total hip arthroplasty (standing and sitting positions). Patients were categorized as 1) stiff spine (standing sacral slope sitting sacral slope < 10°) and 2) normal spine (standing sacral slope-sitting sacral slope ≥ 10°). Results were compared using the paired t-test. The posthoc power analysis showed a power of 0.99. ResultsThe difference in mean standing and sitting sacral slope between the preoperative and postoperative measurements was 1°. However, in standing position, this difference was more than 10° in 14.4% of patients. In the sitting position, this difference was more than 10° in 34.2% of patients and more than 20° in 9.8% of patients. Postoperatively, 32.5% of patients switched groups based on the classification, which rendered the preoperative planning suggested by the current classifications flawed. ConclusionCurrent preoperative planning and classifications are based on a single acquisition of preoperative radiographs without the incorporation of possible postoperative changes in SPT. Validated classifications and planning tools should incorporate repeated measurements to determine the mean and variance in SPT and consider the significant postoperative changes in SPT.