The Effect of the Morphology of the Femur and Acetabulum in Dysplastic Hips on the Selection of Arthroplasty Femoral Implants: A Computer Tomography-Based Study

Abstract

Objectives: Due to the technical challenges associated with femoral reconstruction in total hip arthroplasty for patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), the exact indications for using femoral modular stems, despite their satisfactory clinical outcomes, remain poorly investigated. This study sought to assess the morphology of the femur and acetabulum, and to investigate the discriminative ability of femoral anteversion (FA), acetabular anteversion (AA), and combined anteversion (CA) on the selection of femoral modular stem in dysplastic hips.

Methods: Retrospective data were collected from multiple centers on a total of 230 cases who underwent THA due to DDH from January 1, 2020, to March 1, 2023. There were 46 males and 184 females, with an average age of 51.57 ± 14.87. Patients were stratified according to Crowe and Eftekhar classifications. FA, AA, and CA were measured using computed tomography (CT). The distribution of these indices in different grades of dysplastic hips was compared, and the correlation between these indices and the selection of femoral modular stem was analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and likelihood statistics were performed to investigate the discriminating and predictive value of each index in selecting modular stem.

Results: Two hundred and thirty hips were included in the study. FA increased as the subluxation percentage increased: type I, 21.5°; type II, 28.6°; type III, 34.9°; and type IV, 39.7°. AA was smaller in type I (16.9°) and higher in types II, III, and IV (18.9–22.6°). The area under the curve for the modular stem was 0.87 for FA, 0.86 for CA, and 0.65 for AA. The optimal cutoff values were FA > 32.6°, CA > 50.7°, and AA > 23.3°.

Conclusion: Excessive AA and femoral anteversion FA were observed in Crowe types II, III, and IV cases. FA and CA demonstrated strong discriminative ability and predictive value in the selection of a modular stem. The best cutoff values were ≥32.6° for FA and ≥50.7° for CA in discriminating the use of modular stem. Surgeons may contemplate the use of a modular stem when the preoperative evaluation approaches the cutoff value.

Keywords

3D simulation / Developmental Dysplasia of Hip / Femoral Reconstruction / Modular Stem

References

[1] Bernasek TL, Haidukewych GJ, Gustke KA, Hill O, Levering M. Total hip arthroplasty requiring subtrochanteric osteotomy for developmental hip dysplasia: 5-to 14-year results. J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22(6 Suppl 2): 145–150.

[2] Liu B, Liu SK, Wu T, Liu ZM, Chen X, Li MN, et al. Risk factors for intraoperative Periprosthetic femoral fractures in patients with hip dysplasia undergoing total hip arthroplasty with uncemented prostheses. Orthop Surg. 2021; 13(6): 1870–1881.

[3] Xu LY, Huang Y, Li Y, Shen C, Zheng G, Chen XD. Increased combined anteversion is an independent predictor of Ischiofemoral impingement in the setting of borderline dysplasia with coxa Profunda. Arthroscopy. 2022; 38(5): 1519–1527.

[4] Nakashima Y, Hirata M, Akiyama M, Itokawa T, Yamamoto T, Motomura G, et al. Combined anteversion technique reduced the dislocation in cementless total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2014; 38(1): 27–32.

[5] Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E, Salama JK, Ochi T, Tullos HS. The morphology of the femur in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998; 80(4): 711–719.

[6] Hu Y, Ying H, Yu D, Mao Y, Yan M, Li H, et al. Positive correlation between the femur neck shaft and anteversion angles: aretrospective computed tomography analysis in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Arthroplasty. 2022; 37(3): 538–543.

[7] Ma HY, Lu Q, Sun JY, Du YQ, Shen JM, Gao ZS, et al. One-stage Total hip arthroplasty with modular S-ROM stem for patients with bilateral Crowe type IV developmental dysplasia. Orthop Surg. 2020; 12(6): 1913–1922.

[8] Peters CL, Chrastil J, Stoddard GJ, Erickson JA, Anderson MB, Pelt CE. Can radiographs predict the use of modular stems in developmental dysplasia of the hip? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016; 474(2): 423–429.

[9] Yang Y, Zuo J, Liu T, Xiao J, Liu S, Gao Z. Morphological analysis of true acetabulum in hip dysplasia (Crowe classes I-IV) via 3-D implantation simulation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99(17): e92.

[10] Lu W, Li L, Zhang L, Li Q, Wang E. Development of acetabular anteversion in children with normal hips and those with developmental dysplasia of the hip: a cross-sectional study using magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Orthop. 2021; 92(3): 341–346.

[11] Fujii M, Nakashima Y, Yamamoto T, Mawatari T, Motomura G, Matsushita A, et al. Acetabular retroversion in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010; 92(4): 895–903.

[12] Chen X, Liu X, Wang Y, Ma R, Zhu S, Li S, et al. Development and validation of an artificial intelligence preoperative planning system for total hip arthroplasty. Front Med. 2022; 9: 841202.

[13] Chen X, Li S, Liu X, Wang Y, Ma R, Zhang Y, et al. Acetabular diameter assessment and three-dimensional simulation for acetabular reconstruction in dysplastic hips. J Arthroplasty. 2023; 38: 1551–1558.

[14] Chen X, Wang Y, Ma R, Peng H, Zhu S, Li S, et al. Validation of CT-based three-dimensional preoperative planning in comparison with acetate Templating for primary Total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Surg. 2022; 14(6): 1152–1160.

[15] Crowe JF, Mani VJ, Ranawat CS. Total hip replacement in congenital dislocation and dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979; 61(1): 15–23.

[16] Eftekhar NS. Principles of total hip arthroplasty. C. V. Mosby; 1978.

[17] Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal femoral anatomy in the normal human population. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 467(4): 876–885.

[18] Carmona M, Tzioupis C, LiArno S, Faizan A, Argenson JN, Ollivier M. Upper femur anatomy depends on age and gender: athree-dimensional computed tomography comparative bone morphometric analysis of 628 healthy Patients’ hips. J Arthroplasty. 2019; 34(10): 2487–2493.

[19] Fujii M, Nakashima Y, Sato T, Akiyama M, Iwamoto Y. Acetabular tilt correlates with acetabular version and coverage in hip dysplasia. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 470(10): 2827–2835.

[20] McKibbin B. Anatomical factors in the stability of the hip joint in the newborn. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1970; 52(1): 148–159.

[21] Mukaka MM. Statistics corner: a guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Med J. 2012; 24(3): 69–71.

[22] Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios. BMJ. 2004; 329(7458): 168–169.

[23] Montgomery AA, Graham A, Evans PH, Fahey T. Inter-rater agreement in the scoring of abstracts submitted to a primary care research conference. BMC Health Serv Res. 2002; 2(1): 8.

[24] Giavarina D. Understanding bland Altman analysis. Biochem Med. 2015; 25(2): 141–151.

[25] Zhang M, Liu BL, Qi XZ, Yang QQ, Sun JY, Zheng QY, et al. The three-dimensional morphology of femoral medullary cavity in the developmental dysplasia of the hip. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021; 9: 684832.

[26] Jiang N, Peng L, Al-Qwbani M, Xie GP, Yang QM, Chai Y, et al. Femoral version, neck-shaft angle, and acetabular anteversion in Chinese Han population: a retrospective analysis of 466 healthy adults. Medicine. 2015; 94(21): e891.

[27] Dandachli W, Kannan V, Richards R, Shah Z, Hall-Craggs M, Witt J. Analysis of cover of the femoral head in normal and dysplastic hips: new CT-based technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008; 90(11): 1428–1434.

[28] Liu S, Zuo J, Li Z, Yang Y, Liu T, Xiao J, et al. Study of three-dimensional morphology of the proximal femur in developmental adult dysplasia of the hip suggests that the on-shelf modular prosthesis may not be an ideal choice for patients with Crowe type IV hips. Int Orthop. 2017; 41(4): 707–713.

[29] Yang Y, Liao W, Yi W, Jiang H, Fu G, Ma Y, et al. Three-dimensional morphological study of the proximal femur in Crowe type IV developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Orthop Surg Res. 2021; 16(1): 621.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.