Effect of correction of leg length discrepancy on the biomechanical characteristics of the pelvis and hip joints among standing workers

Impact of Offset and Leg Length on Functional Outcomes Post-Total Hip Arthroplasty: How Accurate Should Coronal Reconstruction Be?

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.

Induced leg length inequality affects pelvis orientation during upright standing immediately following a sit-to-stand transfer: a pre-post measurement study

BACKGROUND

Leg length inequality (LLI) greater than 20 mm has been associated with low back pain (LBP) and its correction is clinically recommended. Much less is known about the biomechanical effects that LLI below 15 mm has on pelvis orientation.

METHODS

Twenty-two adult participants (8 female) aged between 18 and 30 years without LBP were enrolled in the study and completed a series of sit-to-stand trials with no heel-lift (0 mm baseline) and heel-lifts of varying heights (5, 9 and 12 mm) placed in their right shoe. Three-dimensional kinematic data were obtained from the lower extremities, pelvis and thorax. Additional kinematic data were obtained from the left and right sides of the pelvis. The global orientation of the whole pelvis and relative orientation between the left and right sides of the pelvis were obtained in upright standing immediately upon completion of the sit-to-stand movement. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to detect differences in sample means across the different levels of heel-lift (0, 5, 9, and 12 mm). The tests for within-subject effects determined overall significant differences between the means at the different levels of heel-lift induced LLI. Partial Eta-Squared was used to express the size for the main effect of heel-lift height. For each level of heel-lift, the estimated marginal mean and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) values of pelvis angles were illustrated graphically.

RESULTS

Left frontal plane rotation of the pelvis increased (p = 0.001), that is, the left side of the pelvis was lower than the right side of the pelvis, and anterior tilt of the pelvis decreased (p = 0.020) with a heel-lift height (applied on the right) as low as 5 mm. A significant main effect of heel-lift was only observed for the norm of rotations about all three axes for relative-pelvis orientation (p = 0.034). Post-hoc analyses did not reveal any statistically significant differences between the heel-lifts and the 0 mm baseline (p≥0.072).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that correcting leg length inequality below the recommended threshold of 20 mm may influence pelvic orientation. Future work can investigate the effects of the altered orientations on spine loading and the clinical effects of corrections to minor leg length inequality.