Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 34, Issue 8, pp 1115–1121 | Cite as

To what extent does leg length discrepancy impair motor activity in patients after total hip arthroplasty?

  • Maria Grazia BenedettiEmail author
  • Fabio Catani
  • Emanuela Benedetti
  • Lisa Berti
  • Annalisa Di Gioia
  • Sandro Giannini
Original Paper

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of limb lengthening up to 20 mm after THA on symmetry of hip kinematics and kinetics during common activities of daily living. Twenty patients (age range 49–80 years) operated on with Link Lubinus II THA, with lateral access and a mean follow-up of 16 months, were assessed by gait analysis during level walking, stair ascending and descending. The time-distance, hip kinetics and kinematics values were statistically compared between the operated side and the non-operated side in order to assess symmetry. The 12-item Questionnaire was used to assess satisfaction and personal perception of limb lengthening. Mean value of limb lengthening after THA was 11 mm (SD 6). Minor abnormalities were found in the kinematics and kinetics of the operated and non-operated hips during level walking and stair climbing. The score of the questionnaire corresponded to a high level of satisfaction after THA and only two patients complained of limping independent from the amount of discrepancy. From this study we can conclude that a leg length inequality in the range of 1–20 mm does not impair the symmetry of time–distance parameters and of hip kinematics and kinetics during gait and stairs walking. Although objective, gait analysis data did not correspond to patient’s perception of discrepancy, which is subjective and irrespective of the amount of lengthening. There is biomechanical evidence that a limb lengthening of up to two centimetres after THA in general does not need to be corrected by means of a contralateral shoe lift. Individual decisions to the contrary need to be justified.

Keywords

Gait Analysis Limb Length Discrepancy Level Walking Extension Moment External Rotation Moment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Clark CR, Huddleston HD, Schoch EP, Thomas BJ (2006) Leg-length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 14(1):38–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maloney WJ, Keeney JA (2004) Leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthropl 19(4 Suppl 1):108–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parvizi J, Sharkey PF, Bisset GA, Rothman RH, Hozack WJ (2003) Surgical treatment of limb-length discrepancy following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 85-A(12):2310–2317Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shiramizu K, Naito M, Shitama T, Nakamura Y, Shitama H (2004) L-shaped caliper for limb length measurement during total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Br 86(7):966–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Suh KT, Cheon SJ, Kim DW (2004) Comparison of preoperative templating with postoperative assessment cementless total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand 75(1):40–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Upadhyay A, York S, Macaulay W, McGrory B, Robbennolt J, Bal S (2007) Medical malpractice in hip and knee arthroplasty. J Arthropl 22(6 Suppl 2):3–7Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rubash HE, Parvataneni HK (2007) The pants too short, the leg too long: leg length inequality after THA. Orthop 30(9):764–765Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rancont CM (2007) Chronic psoas syndrome caused by the inappropriate use of heel lift. JAOA 107(9):415–418PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Austin SM, Hozack JW, Sharkey PF, Rothman RH (2003) Stability and leg length equality in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 18(3 Suppl 1):88–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Edeen J, Sharkey PF, Alexander AH (1995) Clinical significance of leg-length inequality after total hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop 24:347–351PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    White TO, Dougall TW (2002) Arthroplasty of the hip. The leg length is not important. J Bone Jt Surg (Br) 84-B:335–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elson RA (2003) Arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Jt Surg (Br) 85(4):620–621Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Della Valle CJ, Di Cesare PE (2002) Complications of total hip arthroplasty: neurovascular injury, leg-length discrepancy, and instability. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 60(3–4):134–142Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Konyves A, Bannister GC (2005) The importance of leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg (Br) 87-B(2):155–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wylde V, Whitehouse L, Taylor HA, Pattison GT, Bannister GC, Blom AW (2008) Prevalence and functional impact of patient perceived leg length discrepancy after hip replacement. Int Orthop 24(2):210–216Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lai KA, Lin CJ, Jou IM, Su FC (2001) Gait analysis after total hip arthroplasty with leg-length equalization in women with unilateral congenital complete dislocation of the hip—comparison with untreated patients. J Orthop Res 19:1147–1152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bhave A, Paley D, Herzemberg JE (1999) Improvement in gait parameters after lengthening for the treatment of limb length discrepancy. J Bone Jt Surg (Am) 81:529–534Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gurney B, Mermier C, Robergs R, Gibson A, Rivero D (2001) Effects of limb length discrepancy on gait economy and lower extremity muscle activity in older adults. J Bone Jt Surg (Am) 83:907–915Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ramsperger R, Lubinus P (1996) Preoperative planning in der Huftendoprothetik: Vorstellung eines Computergestutzten System unter Verwendung von CAD-Software. Chirurg 67:734–739PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cappozzo A, Catani F, Della Croce U, Leardini A (1995) Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: anatomical frame definition and determination. Clin Biomech 10(4):171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D (1996) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 78-B (2):185–190Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mont MA, Seyler TM, Ragland PS, Starr R, Erhart J, Bhave A (2007) A gait analysis of patients with resurfacing hip arthroplasty compared with hip osteoarthritis and standard total hip arthroplasty. J Arthrop 22:100–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Woolson ST (1990) Leg length equalization during total hip replacement. Orthop 13:17–21Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ranawat CS, Rodriguez JA (1997) Functional leg-length inequality following total hip arthroplasty. J Arthropl 12(4):359–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Grazia Benedetti
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Fabio Catani
    • 2
  • Emanuela Benedetti
    • 1
  • Lisa Berti
    • 1
  • Annalisa Di Gioia
    • 1
  • Sandro Giannini
    • 2
  1. 1.Movement Analysis Laboratory, Istituto Ortopedico RizzoliUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  2. 2.Surgical Orthopaedic Division, Istituto Ortopedico RizzoliUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  3. 3.Movement Analysis Laboratory, Istituto Ortopedico RizzoliUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations