Non-equivalent results from different anteversion measurements methods for the evaluation of the acetabular cup orientation in total hip arthroplasty

Thom E. Snijders, Tom P.C. Schlösser, Steven M. van Gaalen, Rene M. Castelein, Harrie Weinans, Arthur de Gast

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
69 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective: To determine the comparability among 10 radiographic anteversion methods for acetabular cup orientation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) found in the literature and the “gold” standard of assessing the anteversion with CT. Methods: This is a retrospective study that blindly compares 10 different conventional radiographic anteversion measurements with the “gold” standard, the measurement of anteversion on the transverse plane of the 3-D images made with CT. The patient archiving and communications system (PACS) was systematically searched for subjects that had undergone a CT angiogram of the abdomen and lower extremities, including the pelvis, had at least one THA in situ and had undergone anterior-posterior (AP) and cross-lateral pelvic radiography between January 2013 and August 2016 in the Diakonessenhuis Hospital Utrecht/Zeist, a non-academic institution. CT scans of patients (n = 16) were systematically collected. Three observers independently measured cup anteversion from radiographs, using a total of 10 different methods, and measured the “gold” standard on CT images. The outcomes of the 10 radiographic anteversion were compared in terms of linear correlation with the “gold” standard on CT images. Results: The correlations of the radiographic measured anteversions with the “gold” standard measured on CT images were 0.528 for the method of Liaw, 0.556 for Wan, 0.562 for the cross-lateral method, 0.586 for Hassan, 0.594 for Dorr, 0.602 for Lewinnek, 0.624 for Widmer, 0.671 for the lateral CT, 0.747 for Ackland, and 0.771 for the method of Riten Pradham. Conclusion: Anteversion measurement methods represent different projectional angles of the acetabular cup in different planes around different axes. Therefore, they differ from the “gold” standard and are not interchangeable, as is shown by this study. We consider the anatomical anteversion in the transverse plane rotating around the longitudinal axis as the “gold” standard and recommend avoiding using the term anteversion for other projectional angles in different planes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)241-247
JournalOrthopaedic Surgery
Volume11
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Keywords

  • Acetabular cup
  • Anteversion
  • Orientation
  • Total hip arthroplasty

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Non-equivalent results from different anteversion measurements methods for the evaluation of the acetabular cup orientation in total hip arthroplasty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this