Functional Component Positioning in Total Hip Arthroplasty and the Role of Robotic-Arm Assistance in Addressing Spinopelvic Pathology

Hip, spine, and pelvis function as a unified kinetic chain. Any spinal pathology, results in compensatory changes in the other components to accommodate for the reduced spinopelvic motion. The complex relationship between spinopelvic mobility and component positioning in total hip arthroplasty presents a challenge in achieving functional implant positioning. Patients with spinal pathology, especially those with stiff spines and little change in sacral slope, are at high instability risk. In this challenging subgroup, robotic-arm assistance enables the execution of a patient specific plan, avoiding impingement and maximizing range of motion; especially utilizing virtual range of motion to dynamically assess impingement.

Hip rotation during standing and dynamic activities and the compensatory effect of femoral anteversion: An in-vivo analysis of asymptomatic young adults using three-dimensional computed tomography models and dual fluoroscopy

BACKGROUND

Individuals are thought to compensate for femoral anteversion by altering hip rotation. However, the relationship between hip rotation in a neutral position (i.e. static rotation) and dynamic hip rotation is poorly understood, as is the relationship between anteversion and hip rotation.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

Herein, anteversion and in-vivo hip rotation during standing, walking, and pivoting were measured in eleven asymptomatic, morphologically normal, young adults using three-dimensional computed tomography models and dual fluoroscopy.

METHODS

Using correlation analyses, we: 1) determined the relationship between hip rotation in the static position to that measured during dynamic activities, and 2) evaluated the association between femoral anteversion and hip rotation during dynamic activities. Hip rotation was calculated while standing (static-rotation), throughout gait, as a mean during gait (mean gait rotation), and as a mean (mid-pivot rotation), maximum (max-rotation) and minimum (min-rotation) during pivoting.

RESULTS

Static-rotation (mean ± standard deviation; 11.3° ± 7.3°) and mean gait rotation (7.8° ± 4.7°) were positively correlated (r = 0.679, p = 0.022). Likewise, static-rotation was strongly correlated with mid-pivot rotation (r = 0.837, p = 0.001), max-rotation (r = 0.754, p = 0.007), and min-rotation (r = 0.835, p = 0.001). Strong positive correlations were found between anteversion and hip internal rotation during all of the stance phase (0-60% gait) and during mid- and terminal-swing (86-100% gait) (all r > 0.607, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the static position may be used cautiously to express the neutral rotational position of the femur for dynamic movements. Further, our results indicate that femoral anteversion is compensated for by altering hip rotation. As such, both anteversion and hip rotation may be important to consider when diagnosing hip pathology and planning for surgical procedures.