High Hip Center Research Articles

Computer simulation study of cementless cup placement for dysplastic hip osteoarthritis using subluxation percentage of Crowe classification.

It is often difficult to achieve adequate bone coverage of the cup in total hip arthroplasty in cases of severe developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between subluxation percentage of Crowe classification and cup center-edge (cup-CE) angle to investigate whether subluxation percentage according to the Crowe classification is a useful indicator for cementless cup placement. Cementless cup placement was simulated in 77 women with DDH in 91 hips (Crowe I, 35 hips; Crowe II, 35 hips; and Crowe III, 21 hips) using computed tomography-based computer simulation software. The cups were placed at the anatomic hip center (AHC) and 10-mm high hip center (HHC). The relationship between the subluxation percentage and cup-CE angle was evaluated using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. In addition, the cutoff values for the subluxation percentage that satisfied a cup-CE angle ≥0° were determined using the receiving operating characteristic curve. The cup-CE angle was negatively correlated with the subluxation percentage in both AHC and 10-mm HHC (correlation coefficient ρ = -0.542 [p < 0.01] and -0.704 [p < 0.01], respectively). The cutoff values for subluxation percentage that satisfied a cup-CE angle ≥0° were 56.1% and 73.6% for AHC and 10-mm HHC, respectively. Cementless cup placement in AHC is difficult in cases with the subluxation percentage ≥56.1%, and HHC reconstruction or femoral structural autograft technique should be considered as an alternative. Moreover, placement at 10 mm above AHC is difficult in cases with subluxation percentage ≥73.6%.

Application of high hip center technique in total hip arthroplasty in patients with Crowe typeⅡand Ⅲ developmental dysplasia of hip and severe hip osteoarthritis

To explore the clinical efficacy of high hip center technique total hip arthroplasty （THA） for Crowe Ⅱand Ⅲ developmental dysplasia of hip （DDH） and severe hip osteoarthritis （HOA）. From January 2018 to January 2020, 74 patients with Crowe typeⅡand Ⅲ DDH and severe HOA were admitted, and 37 cases of anatomical hip center reconstruction were taken as control group, including 7 males and 30 females, aged from 42 to 65 years old with an average of （58.40±4.98） years old, body mass index （BMI） ranged from 18 to 29 kg·m-2 with an average of （23.02±2.21） kg·m-2. Thirty-seven routine high hip center technical reconstruction were performed as study group, including 5 males and 32 females, aged from 41 to 65 years old with an average of （57.31±5.42） years old, BMI ranged from 18 to 29 kg·m-2 with an average of （23.14±2.07） kg·m-2. The patients presented with hip pain, limited function and range of motion, and gait instability before surgery. All patients underwent THA, the control group underwent intraoperative anatomical hip center reconstruction, and the study group underwent intraoperative high hip joint reconstruction. The perioperative indicators of the two groups were compared. The hip joint function, balance function and gait of the patients were evaluated before surgery, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery. The length difference of both lower limbs, horizontal distance of rotation center, vertical distance of rotation center and femoral eccentricity were measured before operation and 1 year after operation. The incidence of complications in the two groups during the operation and postoperative follow-up was counted. The operation time of the study group was shorter than that of the control group, and the intraoperative blood loss was less than that of the control group （P<0.05）. After 12-months follow-up, 1 was lost to followvup in study group and 2 were lost to follow-up in control group. The Harris scores and Berg balance scale（BBS）, pace, stride frequency and single step length in the study group were higher than those in the control group at 3 months and 6 months after operation （P<0.05）；there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the indexes 12 months after operation （P>0.05）. The vertical distance of the center of rotation of the study group was greater than that of the control group 12 months after operation （P<0.05）, and there was no significant difference in the length difference of the lower limbs, the horizontal distance of the center of rotation, and the femoral eccentricity between two groups （P>0.05）. There were no complications in either group. The long-term effects of THA in patients with DDH and severe HOA were similar between the two central hip reconstruction methods, and the safety was good, and the high hip central reconstruction technique could shorten the operation time and reduce the amount of intraoperative blood loss.At the same time, it has certain advantages in early recovery of hip joint function, balance function and walking function of patients.

Outcome of high hip centre total hip replacement in a case of development dysplasia of hip: A case report

Background: Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is a common underlying condition leading to secondary osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip [1]. Treatment of DDH in an adult includes arthrodesis, excision arthroplasty, acetabulum and/or femoral osteotomy, and total hip replacement. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the last and definitive surgical treatment modality for end-stage developmental dysplasia of the hip. High hip center THR is needed in Crow types II, III, and IV. To achieve sufficient socket coverage by the native bone, high placement of cementless acetabular cups is often required.

The Role of Global Femoral Offset in Total Hip Arthroplasty with High Hip Center Technique.

The high hip center (HHC) technique has been proposed for the treatment of patients with developmental dysplaisa of the hip (DDH) who have an acetabular bone defect. However, the importance of global femoral offset (FO) in the application of this technique has not been sufficiently appreciated. Our goals were to confirm that the HHC technique is feasible in the treatment of patients with DDH and to assess the function of global FO in this procedure. We retrospectively analyzed 73 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty using high hip center technique for unilateral DDH at our hospital between January 2014 and June 2019. According to global FO, the patients were split into three groups: increased FO group (increment greater than 5 mm), restored FO group (restoration within 5 mm) and decreased FO group (reduction greater than 5 mm). Patients' medical records and plain radiographs were reviewed. One-way ANOVA was used to compare radiographic outcomes and Harris hip score (HHS). Paired t-test was used to assess preoperative and postoperative HHS and leg length discrepancy. Trochanteric pain syndrome, Trendelenburg sign and postoperative limp was evaluated with Fisher's exact test. The average follow-up time was 7.5 ± 1.4 years. The patients' HHS and leg length discrepancy were significantly improved (p < 0.05). In terms of vertical acetabular height, abductor arm, postoperative leg length difference, and acetabular cup inclination, there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups. At the last follow-up, HHS was significantly higher in the restored FO group than in the decreased FO and increased FO groups. Trochanteric pain syndrome occurred in 15.0% and Trendelenburg sign and postoperative limp in 8.2% of all patients, respectively. Trochanteric pain syndrome, Trendelenburg sign and postoperative limp did not differ significantly across the three groups. One patient in increased FO group underwent revision for dislocation 6 years after surgery. The HHC technique is an alternative technique for total hip arthroplasty in patients with acetabular bone abnormalities, according to the results of the mid-term follow-up. Also, controlling the correction of the global femoral offset to within 5 mm may lead to better clinical outcomes.

Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients with Crowe III/IV Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: Acetabular Morphology and Reconstruction Techniques

The severe anatomic deformities render acetabular reconstruction as one of the greatest challenges in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with Crowe III/IV developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Thorough understanding of acetabular morphology and bone defect is the basis of acetabular reconstruction techniques. Researchers have proposed either true acetabulum position reconstruction or high hip center (HHC) position reconstruction. The former can obtain the optimal hip biomechanics, including bulk femoral head autograft, acetabular medial wall displacement osteotomy, and acetabular component medialization, while the latter is relatively easy for hip reduction, as it can avoid neurovascular lesions and obtain more bone coverage; however, it cannot achieve good hip biomechanics. Both techniques have their own advantages and disadvantages. Although there is no consensus on which approach is better, most researchers suggest the true acetabulum position reconstruction. Based on the various acetabular deformities in DDH patients, evaluation of acetabular morphology, bone defect, and bone stock using the 3D image and acetabular component simulation techniques, as well as the soft tissue tension around the hip joint, individualized acetabular reconstruction plans can be formulated and appropriate techniques can be selected to acquire desired clinical outcomes.

Comparison of re-revision rate and radiological outcomes between Kerboull-type plate and metal mesh with impaction bone grafting for revision total hip arthroplasty

BackgroundThis study compared the re-revision rate and radiographic outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device (KT plate) with bulk structural allograft and metal mesh with impaction bone grafting (IBG).MethodsNinety-one hips of 81 patients underwent revision THA for American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) classification type III defects from 2008 to 2018. Of these, seven hips of five patients and 15 hips of 13 patients were excluded due to insufficient follow-up information (< 24 months) and large bone defects with a vertical defect height ≥ 60 mm, respectively. The current study compared the survival and radiographic parameters of 45 hips of 41 patients using a KT plate (KT group) and 24 hips of 24 patients using a metal mesh with IBG (mesh group).ResultsEleven hips (24.4%) in the KT group and 1 hip (4.2%) in the mesh group exhibited radiological failure. Moreover, 8 hips in the KT group (17.0%) required a re-revision THA, while none of the patients in the mesh group required a re-revision. The survival rate with radiographic failure as the endpoint in the mesh group was significantly higher than that in the KT group (100% vs 86.7% at 1-year and 95.8% vs 80.0% at 5-years, respectively; p = 0.032). On multivariable analysis evaluating factors associated with radiographic failure, there were no significant associations with any radiographic measurement. Of the 11 hips with radiographic failure, 1 (11.1%), 3 (12.5%), and 7 (58.3%) hips were of Kawanabe classification stages 2, 3, and 4, respectively.ConclusionsThe findings of this study suggest that revision THA using KT plates with bulk structure allografts could provide poorer clinical outcomes than revision THA using a metal mesh with IBG. Although revision THA using KT plates with bulk structural allografts could set the true hip center, there is no association between a high hip center and clinical outcomes. The relationship between the position of the KT plate and the host bone might be considered more carefully.

Cup Overhanging in Anatomic Socket Position or High Hip Center of Rotation in Total Hip Arthroplasty for Crowe III and IV Dysplasia: A CT-Based Simulation.

Cup overhanging in total hip arthroplasty is a predisposing factor to iliopsoas impingement. In dysplastic hips, cup implantation was simulated in an anatomic hip center of rotation (AHCR) and in high hip center (HHCR). We sought to assess: (1) the percentage of prominent cups; (2) quantify the cup protrusion at different sites on frontal, axial and sagittal views. In 40 Crowe III-IV hips, using a 3D CT-based planning software, cup planning in AHCR and HHCR (CR height ≥ 20 mm) was performed for every hip. Cup prominence was assessed on every plane. HHCR cups were less anteverted (p < 0.01), less medialized (p < 0.001) and less caudal (p = 0.01) than AHCR sockets. AHCR cups were more frequently prominent on at least one plane (92.5% vs. 77.5%), with minimal agreement between the two configurations (k = 0.31, p = 0.07). AHCR cups protruded more than HHCR sockets in the sagittal (p = 0.02) and axial planes (p < 0.001). Axially, at the center of the cup, prominence 6−11 mm occurred in nine (22.5%) AHCR and one (2.5%) HHCR socket. In conclusion, while a routine high hip center should not be recommended, cup placement at a center of rotation height < 20 mm is associated with higher rates and magnitudes of anterior cup protrusion in severe dysplasia.

Meta-analysis of the Efficacy of the Anatomical Center and High Hip Center Techniques in the Treatment of Adult Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip.

Background In total hip arthroplasty for the treatment of adult developmental dysplasia of the hip, there is considerable controversy regarding the placement of the acetabular cup, anatomic center, and upward in acetabular reconstruction. This article explores the efficacy of the anatomical center technique and high hip center technique in the treatment of adult developmental dysplasia of the hip. Method By searching for articles in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, CNKI, and Wanfang databases, we collected the literature on the treatment of adult developmental dysplasia of the hip by anatomical center and high hip center technology and screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials, the quality of the literature in retrospective cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale, and the RevMan 5.4 software was used to analyze the extracted outcome indicators. Results Nine studies were finally included, including one prospective cohort study, eight retrospective cohort studies, two high-quality studies, and six moderate-quality studies. The meta-analysis results showed that the reconstruction of the acetabulum in two positions was significantly different in terms of operation time (WMD = −37, 95% CI: -45.25-28.74, P < 0.00001), intraoperative blood loss (WMD = −91.88, 95% CI: -108.57-75.19, P < 0.00001), postoperative drainage volume (WMD = 80.55, 95% CI: -140.56-301.66, P = 0.48), time to ground (WMD = −0.68, 95% CI: -1.37-0.0, P = 0.05), Harris score (WMD = −0.04, 95% CI: -0.91-0.82, P = 0.92), lower limb length difference (WMD = 0.21, 95% CI: -0.22-0.64, P = 0.33), WOMAC score (WMD = −1.24, 95% CI: -4.89-2.41, P = 0.51), postoperative complications (RD = −0.02, 95% CI: -0.06-0.02, P = 0.44), Trendelenburg sign (RD = −0.02, 95% CI: -0.02-0.05,P = 0.31), limb lengthening (WMD = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.61-1.09, P < 0.00001), prosthesis wear (WMD = 0.01, 95% CI: 0-0.02, P = 0.17), and prosthesis loosening (RD = 0.01, 95% CI: -0.02-0.04, P = 0.45). Conclusions The high hip center technique can reduce operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and downtime. The anatomical center technique is superior to the high hip center technique in terms of limb lengthening. Compared with acetabular anatomical reconstruction, there was no significant difference in postoperative drainage, lower limb length difference, postoperative complications, Trendelenburg sign, and prosthesis survival or wear. For DDH patients who are not severely shortened in the lower limbs and have severe acetabular bone defects, joint surgeons can choose to reconstruct the acetabulum in the upper part to simplify the operation, reduce the trauma of the patient, and accelerate the recovery of the patient, and they can choose to adjust the length of the neck and the angle of the neck shaft to maintain the moment arm of the abductor muscle. A ceramic interface or a highly cross-linked polyethylene interface minimizes the effect of hip response forces. To further evaluate the efficacy of the anatomical center technique and the high hip center technique in the treatment of adult developmental dysplasia of the hip, more large-sample, high-quality, long-term follow-up randomized controlled trials are still needed for verification.

Total hip arthroplasty after rotational acetabular osteotomy for developmental dysplasia of the hip: a retrospective observational study

BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty after osteotomy is more technically challenging than primary total hip arthroplasty, especially concerning cup placement. This is attributed to bone morphological abnormalities caused by acetabular bone loss and osteophyte formation. This study aimed to investigate the clinical and radiological outcomes of total hip arthroplasty after rotational acetabular osteotomy compared with those of primary total hip arthroplasty, focusing mainly on acetabular deformity and cup position.MethodsThe study included 22 hips that had undergone rotational acetabular osteotomy and 22 hips in an age- and sex-matched control group of patients who underwent total hip arthroplasties between 2005 and 2020. We analyzed cup abduction and anteversion; lateral, anterior, and posterior cup center–edge angle; hip joint center position; femoral anteversion angle; and presence of acetabular defect using postoperative radiography and computed tomography. Operative results and clinical evaluations were also analyzed.ResultsThe clinical evaluation showed that the postoperative flexion range of motion was lower in total hip arthroplasty after rotational acetabular osteotomy than in primary total hip arthroplasty, although no significant difference was noted in the postoperative total Japanese Orthopedic Association hip score. The operative time was significantly longer in the rotational acetabular osteotomy group than in the control group, but there was no significant difference in blood loss. The lateral cup center–edge angle was significantly higher and the posterior cup center–edge angle was significantly lower in the total hip arthroplasty after rotational acetabular osteotomy, suggesting a posterior bone defect existed in the acetabulum. In total hip arthroplasty after rotational acetabular osteotomy, the hip joint center was located significantly superior and lateral to the primary total hip arthroplasty.ConclusionsIn total hip arthroplasty after rotational acetabular osteotomy, the cup tended to be placed in the superior and lateral positions, where there was more bone volume. The deformity of the acetabulum and the high hip center should be considered for treatment success because they may cause cup instability, limited range of motion, and impingement.

Research status of acetabular reconstruction in Crowe type Ⅱ and Ⅲ developmental dysplasia of the hip

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is a major cause of hip arthritis and ultimately total hip arthroplasty. Due to the dysplastic acetabulum, how to place the acetabular cup becomes a challenge in acetabular reconstruction for such patients. Especially in the acetabula classified as Crowe typeⅡand type Ⅲ, the dislocation of the femoral head causes bone defects above the true acetabulum, which will affect the stability of the acetabular cup when the acetabular reconstruction is performed at the true acetabulum. Many acetabular reconstruction methods such as bone grafting, the use of small acetabular cups, socket medialization technique, and high hip center technique are used to increase the host bone coverage of the cup. However, each method has its own shortcomings that can not be ignored so that there is no unified conclusion on the acetabular reconstruction methods for Crowe typeⅡand type Ⅲ hip dysplasia. This article summarized and evaluated various reconstruction methods in combination with the acetabular morphology of DDH, and put forward the research direction in the future.

Does total hip arthroplasty with high hip centre in dysplasia compromise acetabular bone stock?

The placement of uncemented acetabular components during total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Crowe II and Crowe III dysplasia can be at the anatomic or high hip centre position. Using computerised tomography data, we simulated acetabular cup placement at the anatomic hip centre and the high hip centre positions to assess whether there is a difference between the 2 in terms of bone loss from acetabular reaming and in acetabular coverage by host bone. The study population included a consecutive cohort of 19 patients (22 hips) with Crowe II or III dysplasia. 3-dimensional models of the pelvis were created for each patient and digital templating was used to determine the anatomic and high hip centre positions. The coordinates of the digitally templated cup positions were fed into an image processing software to estimate the amount of bone reamed, the cup coverage by host bone and the elevation from tear drop. The mean volume of bone reamed was greater in the high hip centre position as compared to the anatomic position (27.3 ± 11. 4 cm3 vs. 19.4 ± 12.2 cm3, p < 0.0001). The coverage of the acetabular cup by host bone was greater in the high hip centre position (87.3 ± 5.9% vs. 68.3 ± 10%). The mean elevation in the high hip centre group was 13 mm with 3 hips having a breach of the medial wall. In Crowe II and III dysplasia, placement of acetabular cups at the anatomic hip centre better preserves bone stock as compared to high hip centre placement and should be preferred in young patients requiring THA.

High hip center arthroplasty in the treatment of severe hip dysplasia: Are knee and ankle compromised?

BackgroundThere is limited information about the effect of hip center location on gait parameters of knee and ankle. This study aimed to compare anatomical vs. high hip center arthroplasty according to gait parameters of knee and ankle and investigate whether the high hip center has any adverse effect on these joints or not. Methods20 patients who underwent unilateral total hip arthroplasty (Group 1; 10 patients with anatomical reconstruction, Group 2; 10 patients with high hip center) due to Crowe type III-IV developmental dysplasia of the hip and completed 2 years of follow-up were included. The patients were examined by 3-D gait analysis. FindingsThe maximum extension of the knee on the operated side was lower in Group 2 (p = 0.044). Longitudinal knee joint force was higher in Group 2 on both operated (p = 0.041) and non-operated sides (p = 0.031). Lateral knee joint force was also higher in Group 2 (p = 0.023). No significant difference was detected in ankle parameters. InterpretationUnilateral high hip center has been shown to restrict the dynamic knee range of motion on the operated side and increase the knee load on both sides, thus putting the knees at risk for osteoarthritis. Level of evidenceLevel III, Retrospective comparative study.

Bone defect map of the true acetabulum in hip dysplasia (Crowe type II and III) based on three-dimensional image reconstruction analysis

The high hip center technique (HHC) is considered to be feasible for acetabular reconstruction in patients with DDH, but there is little in-depth study of its specific impact on Crowe type II and III DDH. The purpose of this study was to simultaneously analyze the effect of HHC on bone coverage of the cup (CC) in the acetabular reconstruction of type II and III DDH patients and to propose a map of acetabular bone defects from the perspective of the cup. Forty-nine hip CT data of 39 patients with DDH (Crowe type II and III) were collected to simulate acetabular reconstruction by cup models of different sizes (diameter 38mm–50 mm, 2 mm increment) with the HHC technique. The frequency distribution was plotted by overlapping the portions of the 44 mm cups that were not covered by the host bone. The mean CC of cups with sizes of 38 mm, 40 mm, 42 mm, 44 mm, 46 mm, 48 mm, and 50 mm at the true acetabula were 77.85%, 76.71%, 75.73%, 74.56%, 73.68%, 72.51%, and 71.75%, respectively, and the maximum CC increments were 21.24%, 21.58%, 20.86%, 20.04%, 18.62%, 17.18%, and 15.42% (P < 0.001), respectively, after the cups were elevated from the true acetabula. The bone defect map shows that 95% of type II and III DDH acetabula had posterosuperior bone defects, and approximately 60% were located outside the force line of the hip joint. Acetabular cups can meet a CC of more than 70% at the true acetabulum, and approximately 60% of Crowe type II and III DDH patients can obtain satisfactory CC at the true acetabulum by using a 44-mm cup without additional operations.

Long-term results of combined porous tantalum augments and titanium-coated cups for Paprosky type III bone defects in acetabular revision.

The use of porous tantalum augments and titanium-coated cups in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with acetabular defects has shown satisfactory outcomes in our centre. The aim of this study was to report the long-term radiological and clinical outcomes of using this combination for Paprosky type III acetabular bone defects in acetabular revision. Between January 2007 and January 2015, 45 patients with Paprosky type III acetabular defects underwent acetabular revision using a combination of porous tantalum augments and titanium-coated cups. Among these, 41 patients (41 hips) had complete follow-up. Thirty-one patients had a Paprosky type IIIA defect, and ten patients had a Paprosky type IIIB defect. No patients had pelvic discontinuity. There were 20 males and 21 females with an average age of 63.2years (range 35-80) at the time of revision surgery. The mean follow-up was 122.8months (range 69-165). The Harris Hip Score (HHS) improved significantly from 32.1 points (range 17-58) pre-operatively to 85.3 points (63-98) at the last follow-up. The Short Form-12 (SF-12) and Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) improved significantly for each item at the last follow-up. Two patients had a high hip centre post-operatively. One patient had recurrent dislocation but did not require re-revision. No further revision of the acetabular components was required, and all hips remained stable at the last follow-up with bony ingrowth of the acetabular components according to the criteria of Moore et al. CONCLUSION: The combination of tantalum augments and conventional titanium-coated cups achieved satisfactory long-term radiographic and clinical outcomes for Paprosky type III acetabular bone defects without pelvic discontinuity.

Functional and radiographical results of asymmetrically reconstructed total hip arthroplasty in patients with bilateral dysplastic arthritic hips with one hip Crowe II\u2013III and the other Crowe IV: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundThe study aimed to evaluate the functional and radiographical results of asymmetrically reconstructed total hip arthroplasty in patients with bilateral dysplastic arthritic hips with one hip Crowe II–III and the other hip Crowe IV.Materials and methodsFrom April 2006 to April 2019, we evaluated 23 patients who had a reconstruction of one Crowe II–III hip with high hip center (HHC) and the other Crowe IV hip at the anatomical position (H group). The radiographic and clinical outcomes were compared with those of a control group of 19 patients with bilateral dysplasia who had one Crowe IV hip and the contralateral hip both reconstructed in the anatomical position (A group). Medical records and radiographs were reviewed, and a complete follow-up was conducted for all patients.ResultsThe mean vertical center of rotation (V-COR) and horizontal center of rotation (H-COR) in the H group were 30.6 ± 5.8 mm and 30.0 ± 5.5 mm, respectively. In the A group, the corresponding values were 14.0 ± 4.3 mm and 23.0 ± 2.3 mm, respectively. A significant difference was found in terms of V-COR and H-COR between the two groups, and no significant difference was shown regarding the cup inclination, abductor lever arm (ALA), ALA ratio, and leg length discrepancy (LLD). Three patients of the H group and four patients of the A group exhibited LLD > 10 mm. All seven patients who had LLD > 10 mm underwent the shortening subtrochanteric osteotomy (SSTO) of the Crowe IV hip. Subgroup analysis based on the presence and absence of SSTO showed that the LLD of the SSTO group was greater than that of the non-SSTO group in both groups, but the difference was only statistically significant in the A group. At the last follow-up, the mean Harris Hip Scores significantly improved in the two groups, and there was no revision during the follow-up period. In the H group, four patients presented with a slight limp and three patients with a moderate limp, while it was six patients and one patient in the A group, respectively.ConclusionsAsymmetrical reconstruction in patients with bilateral dysplastic arthritic hips with one hip Crowe II–III and the other Crowe IV is acceptable and comparable when compared with bilateral anatomical reconstruction.Level of evidenceIII, retrospective observational study.Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trail Registry. ChiCTR2000033848

Does Cup Position at the High Hip Center or Anatomic Hip Center in THA for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip Result in Better Harris Hip Scores and Revision Incidence? A Systematic Review.

One goal of THA is to restore the anatomic hip center, which can be achieved in hips with developmental dysplasia by placing cups at the level of the native acetabulum. However, this might require adjuvant procedures such as femoral shortening osteotomy. Another option is to place the cup at the high hip center, potentially reducing surgical complexity. Currently, no clear consensus exists regarding which of these cup positions might offer better functional outcomes or long-term survival. We performed a systematic review to determine whether (1) functional outcomes as measured by the Harris hip score, (2) revision incidence, and (3) complications that do not result in revision differ based on the position of the acetabular cup (high hip center versus anatomic hip center) in patients undergoing THA for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). We performed a systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, including studies comparing the functional outcomes, revision incidence, and complications of primary THA in dysplastic hips with acetabular cups placed at the high hip center versus those placed at the anatomic hip center, over any time frame. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020168183) before commencement. Of 238 records, eight comparative, retrospective nonrandomized studies of interventions were eligible for our systematic review, reporting on 207 hips with cups placed at the high hip center and 268 hips with cups at the anatomic hip center. Risk of bias within eligible studies was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Due to low comparability between studies, data could not be pooled, so these studies were assessed without summary effects. Six studies compared Harris hip scores, two of which favored high hip center cup placement and three of which favored anatomic hip center cup placement, although none of the differences between cohorts met the minimum clinically important difference. Five studies reliably compared revision incidence, which ranged from 2% to 9% for high hip center at 7 to 15 years and 0% to 5.9% for anatomic hip center at 6 to 16 years. Five studies reported intra- and postoperative complications, with the high hip center being associated with higher incidence of dislocation and lower incidence of neurological complications. No clear difference was observed in intraoperative complications between the high hip center and anatomic hip center. No obvious differences could be observed in Harris hip score or revision incidence after THA for osteoarthritis secondary to DDH between cups placed at the anatomic hip center and those placed at the high hip center. Placement of the acetabular cup in the high hip center may lead to higher risk of dislocation but lower risk of neurologic complications, although no difference in intraoperative complications was observed. Surgeons should be able to achieve satisfactory functional scores and revision incidence using either technique, although they should be aware of how their choice influences hip biomechanics and the need for adjunct procedures and associated risks and operative time. These recommendations should be considered with respect to the several limitations in the studies reviewed, including the presence of serious confounding factors and selection biases, inconsistent definitions of the high hip center, variations in dysplasia severity, small sample sizes, and follow-up periods. These weaknesses should be addressed in well-designed future studies. Level III, therapeutic study.

CORR Insights®: Does Cup Position at the High Hip Center or Anatomic Hip Center in THA for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip Result in Better Harris Hip Scores and Revision Incidence? A Systematic Review.

CORR Insights®: Does Cup Position at the High Hip Center or Anatomic Hip Center in THA for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip Result in Better Harris Hip Scores and Revision Incidence? A Systematic Review.

Three-dimensional gait of patients with developmental dysplasia of hip undergoing total hip arthroplasty with high hip center

Three-dimensional gait of patients with developmental dysplasia of hip undergoing total hip arthroplasty with high hip center

Long-term results of medial open reduction surgery on pelvic and hip kinematics in children with developmental hip dislocation:A pilot study

Total hip arthroplasty in severe dysplasia is challenging due to diminished periacetabular bone stock and the highly placed femoral head. Although anatomical reconstruction of the hip, with required interventions such as subtrochanteric osteotomy and graft usage, is the main aim of the procedure, good long-term clinical outcomes of the high hip center technique have also been reported. Information regarding the effect of hip center placement on gait characteristics is limited; therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the differences in gait parameters between the high hip center technique and anatomical reconstruction of the hip.Twenty patients (40 hips) with bilateral Crowe type III-IV developmental dysplasia of the hip who underwent bilateral total hip arthroplasty and completed at least 2 years of follow-up were included. Group 1 comprised 10 patients (20 hips) who underwent anatomical hip center reconstruction, while group 2 comprised 10 patients (20 hips) who underwent high hip center reconstruction. The gait characteristics of patients were examined through markers placed in certain anatomical regions, the cameras placed around, and the force plates embedded in the walking platform.There was no significant difference in the gait characteristics according to the location of the hip rotation center. The mean temporospatial, kinematic, and kinetic values were similar between the groups. The most prominent difference was in the peak dynamic hip extension, which was lower in group 2 (−9.71° ± 7.46°) compared to group 1 (−6.80° ± 11.44°), although it was not statistically significant (P = .09).The bilateral high hip center technique can provide similar gait characteristics as anatomical reconstruction and may be preferred in particularly difficult cases based on the surgeon’s decision.

Evaluation of Dislocation Risk Factors With Total Hip Arthroplasty in Developmental Hip Dysplasia Patients: A Multivariate Analysis

BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the risk factors for dislocation in patients diagnosed with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) who underwent total hip arthroplasty. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 40 patients who developed dislocation and compared them with 400 patients in the control group without hip instability. Patients-, surgery-, and implant-related factors were investigated. Risk factors were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression. ResultsThe mean follow-up period was 32.3 months. The mean time to dislocation was 4.4 months. There were 7 men (17.5%) and 33 women (82.5%) in the dislocation group and 83 men (20.7%) and 317 women (79.3%) in the control group (P = .627). Diabetes mellitus (DM; P = .032) and history of previous hip surgery for DDH were associated with dislocation (P < .001). The subtrochanteric shortening osteotomy (P = .001), acetabular inclination (P = .037), acetabular anteversion (P < .001), femoral head size (P < .001), and postoperative infection (P = .003) were associated with dislocation. Major predictors of hip dislocation after total hip arthroplasty in patients with DDH were previous hip surgery (odds ratio [OR], 6.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.86-24.6; P = .004), high hip center (OR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.31-6.38; P = .008), DM (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.06-6.80; P = .037), and acetabular inclination (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.09-6.26; P = .03). ConclusionPatients with DM and previous hip surgery should be informed about increased dislocation rates. Using a larger head diameter and restoration of the true hip rotation center are essential to prevent hip dislocation in these patients. Furthermore, accurate positioning of the acetabular inclination and anteversion are also important.