Impact of Offset and Leg Length on Functional Outcomes Post-Total Hip Arthroplasty: How Accurate Should Coronal Reconstruction Be?
- PMID: 38897260
- DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2024.06.017
Impact of Offset and Leg Length on Functional Outcomes Post-Total Hip Arthroplasty: How Accurate Should Coronal Reconstruction Be?
Abstract
Background: Accurate hip reconstruction is associated with improved biomechanical behavior following total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, whether this is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is unknown.
Hypothesis/purpose: This study aimed to: 1) describe the ability to reconstruct coronal geometry during THA without advanced technology; 2) assess whether restoration of global offset (GO) and leg length (LL) is associated with improved PROs; and 3) investigate whether increased femoral offset (FO) to compensate for reduced acetabular offset (AO) influences PROs.
Method: This was a prospective, multicenter, consecutive cohort study of 500 patients treated with primary THA without robotics or navigation. The Oxford Hip score (OHS) was obtained preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up. Supine anteroposterior pelvic radiographs were analyzed to determine AO, FO, GO, and LL relative to the native contralateral side. Contour plots for ΔOHS based on ΔLL and ΔGO were created, and ΔOHS was calculated within and outside various ranges (±2.5, ±5, or ±10 mm).
Results: In the operated hip, mean FO increased by 3 ± 6 mm (range, -16 to 27), while AO decreased by 2 ± 4 mm (range, -17 to 10). The contour graph for ±2.5 mm zones showed the best outcomes (ΔOHS >25) with GO and LL centered on 0 ± 2.5 mm (P < .01). However, only 10% achieved such reconstruction. When GO and LL differences were within ±10 mm, ΔOHS was superior when both AO and FO were within ±5 mm (mean: 24 ± 10; range, -5 to 40) compared with when FO was above 5 mm to compensate for a reduction in AO (mean: 22 ± 11; range, -10 to 46; P = .040).
Conclusions: The PROs were associated with biomechanical reconstruction, and the best clinical improvement can be expected when GO and LL differences are both within 2.5 mm. Maintenance of AO is important, as compensation by increasing FO is associated with inferior OHS.
Keywords: THA; acetabular offset; femoral offset; functional outcomes; hip offset; leg length.
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Pre-operative planning in THA. Part III: do implant size prediction and offset restoration influence functional outcomes after THA?Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020 Apr;140(4):563-573. doi: 10.1007/s00402-020-03342-5. Epub 2020 Jan 23. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020. PMID: 31974695
-
Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: a randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Jun;88(6):721-6. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B6.17447. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006. PMID: 16720762 Clinical Trial.
-
Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: comparison between modular short-stem hip arthroplasty and conventional total hip arthroplasty.Int Orthop. 2012 Jul;36(7):1341-7. doi: 10.1007/s00264-011-1477-2. Epub 2012 Jan 20. Int Orthop. 2012. PMID: 22262250 Free PMC article.
-
Femoral offset: anatomical concept, definition, assessment, implications for preoperative templating and hip arthroplasty.Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009 May;95(3):210-9. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2009.03.010. Epub 2009 May 6. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009. PMID: 19423418 Review.
-
Offset Considerations in Total Hip Arthroplasty.J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2024 Oct 15;32(20):921-928. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00931. Epub 2024 Jun 28. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2024. PMID: 39365163 Review.
Cited by
-
Does the Implantation of a Short-Stem Hip Prosthesis Change the Lower Limb Alignment?-Comparison of Two Modern Short-Stem Designs.J Clin Med. 2025 Mar 25;14(7):2240. doi: 10.3390/jcm14072240. J Clin Med. 2025. PMID: 40217691 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous