Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging and Navigation Measurement of Acetabular Component Position in THA

  • Symposium: Papers Presented at the Hip Society Meetings 2008
  • Published:
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Abstract

There are six different definitions of acetabular position based on observed inclination and anteversion made in either the (1) anterior pelvic plane or (2) coronal planes and based on whether each of the observations made in one of these two planes is (1) anatomic, (2) operative, or (3) radiographic. Anteroposterior pelvic tilt is the angle between the anterior pelvic plane and the coronal plane of the body. The coronal plane is a functional plane and the anterior pelvic plane is an anatomic pelvic plane. A cup may be in the “safe zone” by one definition but may be out of the “safe zone” by another definition. We reviewed published studies, analyzed the difference in varying definitions, evaluated the influence of the anterior pelvic tilt, and provided methods to convert from one definition to another. We recommend all inclination and anteversion measurements be converted to the radiographic inclination and anteversion based on the coronal plane, which is equivalent to the inclination and anteversion on the anteroposterior pelvic radiograph.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3A–B
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ackland MK, Bourne WB, Uhthoff HK. Anteversion of the acetabular cup. Measurement of angle after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986;68:409–413.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Anda S, Svenningsen S, Dale LG, Benum P. The acetabular sector angle of the adult hip determined by computed tomography. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1986;27:443–447.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Anda S, Svenningsen S, Grontvedt T, Benum P. Pelvic inclination and spatial orientation of the acetabulum. A radiographic, computed tomographic and clinical investigation. Acta Radiol. 1990;31:389–394.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Babisch JW, Layher F, Amiot LP. The rationale for tilt-adjusted acetabular cup navigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:357–365.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Blendea S, Eckman K, Jaramaz B, Levison TJ, Digioia AM 3rd. Measurements of acetabular cup position and pelvic spatial orientation after total hip arthroplasty using computed tomography/radiography matching. Comput Aided Surg. 2005;10:37–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen E, Goertz W, Lill CA. Implant position calculation for acetabular cup placement considering pelvic lateral tilt and inclination. Comput Aided Surg. 2006;11:309–316.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Coventry MB, Beckenbaugh RD, Nolan DR, Ilstrup DM. 2,012 total hip arthroplasties. A study of postoperative course and early complications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1974;56:273–284.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. D’Lima DD, Urquhart AG, Buehler KO, Walker RH, Colwell CW Jr. The effect of the orientation of the acetabular and femoral components on the range of motion of the hip at different head-neck ratios. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:315–321.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. DiGioia AM, Hafez MA, Jaramaz B, Levison TJ, Moody JE. Functional pelvic orientation measured from lateral standing and sitting radiographs. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;453:272–276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. DiGioia AM, Jaramaz B, Blackwell M, Simon DA, Morgan F, Moody JE, Nikou C, Colgan BD, Aston CA, Labarca RS, Kischell E, Kanade T. The Otto Aufranc Award. Image guided navigation system to measure intraoperatively acetabular implant alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;355:8–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Digioia AM 3rd, Jaramaz B, Plakseychuk AY, Moody JE Jr, Nikou C, Labarca RS, Levison TJ, Picard F. Comparison of a mechanical acetabular alignment guide with computer placement of the socket. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:359–364.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dorr LD, Bechtol CO, Watkins RG, Wan Z. Radiographic anatomic structure of the arthritic acetabulum and its influence on total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:890–900.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Dorr LD, Hishiki Y, Wan Z, Newton D, Yun A. Development of imageless computer navigation for acetabular component position in total hip replacement. Iowa Orthop J. 2005;25:1–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dorr LD, Malik A, Wan Z, Long WT, Harris M. Precision and bias of imageless computer navigation and surgeon estimates for acetabular component position. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;465:92–99.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dorr LD, Wan Z. Causes of and treatment protocol for instability of total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;355:144–151.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Eckman K, Hafez MA, Ed F, Jaramaz B, Levison TJ, Digioia AM 3rd. Accuracy of pelvic flexion measurements from lateral radiographs. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;451:154–160.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Eddine TA, Migaud H, Chantelot C, Cotten A, Fontaine C, Duquennoy A. Variations of pelvic anteversion in the lying and standing positions: analysis of 24 control subjects and implications for CT measurement of position of a prosthetic cup. Surg Radiol Anat. 2001;23:105–110.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Haaker RG, Tiedjen K, Ottersbach A, Rubenthaler F, Stockheim M, Stiehl JB. Comparison of conventional versus computer-navigated acetabular component insertion. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:151–159.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Harris WH. Advances in surgical technique for total hip replacement: without and with osteotomy of the greater trochanter. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;146:188–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hassan DM, Johnston GH, Dust WN, Watson LG, Cassidy D. Radiographic calculation of anteversion in acetabular prostheses. J Arthroplasty. 1995;10:369–372.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Herrlin K, Pettersson H, Selvik G. Comparison of two- and three-dimensional methods for assessment of orientation of the total hip prosthesis. Acta Radiol. 1988;29:357–361.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Jaramaz B, DiGioia AM 3rd, Blackwell M, Nikou C. Computer assisted measurement of cup placement in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;354:70–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jolles BM, Genoud P, Hoffmeyer P. Computer-assisted cup placement techniques in total hip arthroplasty improve accuracy of placement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;426:174–179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jolles BM, Zangger P, Leyvraz PF. Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multivariate analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:282–288.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kalteis T, Handel M, Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Grifka J. Imageless navigation for insertion of the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty: is it as accurate as CT-based navigation? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:163–167.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kalteis T, Handel M, Herold T, Perlick L, Baethis H, Grifka J. Greater accuracy in positioning of the acetabular cup by using an image-free navigation system. Int Orthop. 2005;29:272–276.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kalteis T, Handel M, Herold T, Perlick L, Paetzel C, Grifka J. Position of the acetabular cup—accuracy of radiographic calculation compared to CT-based measurement. Eur J Radiol. 2006;58:294–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Komeno M, Hasegawa M, Sudo A, Uchida A. Computed tomographic evaluation of component position on dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2006;29:1104–1108.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lembeck B, Mueller O, Reize P, Wuelker N. Pelvic tilt makes acetabular cup navigation inaccurate. Acta Orthop. 2005;76:517–523.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmerman JR. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60:217–220.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. McCollum DE, Gray WJ. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Causes and prevention. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;261:159–170.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mian SW, Truchly G, Pflum FA. Computed tomography measurement of acetabular cup anteversion and retroversion in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992;276:206–209.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Muller ME. Proceedings: the present state of total hip joint prosthesis [in German]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1974;112:933–938.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Murray DW. The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75:228–232.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Nishihara S, Sugano N, Nishii T, Ohzono K, Yoshikawa H. Measurements of pelvic flexion angle using three-dimensional computed tomography. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;411:140–151.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Nogler M, Kessler O, Prassl A, Donnelly B, Streicher R, Sledge JB, Krismer M. Reduced variability of acetabular cup positioning with use of an imageless navigation system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;426:159–163.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pettersson H, Gentz CF, Lindberg HO, Carlsson AS. Radiologic evaluation of the position of the acetabular component of the total hip prosthesis. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1982;23:259–263.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Pierchon F, Pasquier G, Cotten A, Fontaine C, Clarisse J, Duquennoy A. Causes of dislocation of total hip arthroplasty. CT study of component alignment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994;76:45–48.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Pradhan R. Planar anteversion of the acetabular cup as determined from plain anteroposterior radiographs. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999;81:431–435.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Reikeras O, Bjerkreim I, Kolbenstvedt A. Anteversion of the acetabulum in patients with idiopathic increased anteversion of the femoral neck. Acta Orthop Scand. 1982;53:847–852.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Richolt JA, Effenberger H, Rittmeister ME. How does soft tissue distribution affect anteversion accuracy of the palpation procedure in image-free acetabular cup navigation? An ultrasonographic assessment. Comput Aided Surg. 2005;10:87–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Robinson A. Pelvis. In: Robinson A, ed. Cunningham’s Text-book of Anatomy. 5th Ed. New York: William Wood and Company; 1918:255–260.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Siebenrock KA, Kalbermatten DF, Ganz R. Effect of pelvic tilt on acetabular retroversion: a study of pelves from cadavers. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;407:241–248.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Tang WM, Chiu KY. Primary total hip arthroplasty in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:52–58.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Visser JD, Konings JG. A new method for measuring angles after total hip arthroplasty. A study of the acetabular cup and femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1981;63:556–559.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Widmer KH. A simplified method to determine acetabular cup anteversion from plain radiographs. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19:387–390.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Widmer KH, Zurfluh B. Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion. J Orthop Res. 2004;22:815–821.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wolf A, Digioia AM 3rd, Mor AB, Jaramaz B. Cup alignment error model for total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;437:132–137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Arthritis Institute at Good Samaritan Hospital, 637 S. Lucas Avenue, 5th Floor, Los Angeles, CA, 90017, USA

    Zhinian Wan MD, Aamer Malik MD, Lisa Chao BS & Lawrence D. Dorr MD

  2. Simulation and Interactive Media, Innovation Center, Magee Womens Hospital of UPMC, 3380 Boulevard of the Allies, Suite 270, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Branislav Jaramaz PhD

Authors
  1. Zhinian Wan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aamer Malik MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Branislav Jaramaz PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lisa Chao BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lawrence D. Dorr MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence D. Dorr MD.

Additional information

Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

Each author certifies that his or her institution has approved the human protocol for this investigation and that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research.

Appendices

Appendix 1. Equations Connecting Anatomic, Operative, and Radiographic

Inclination and Anteversion on the Same Plane

OI = asin (sin (AI) * cos (AV))

(1)

OV = atan (tan (AI) * sin (AV))

(2)

RI = atan (tan (AI) * cos (AV))

(3)

RV = asin (sin (AI) * sin (AV))

(4)

AI = acos (cos (OI) * cos (OV))

(5)

AV = atan (cot (OI) * sin (OV))

(6)

RI = atan (tan (OI) / cos (OV))

(7)

RV = asin (cos (OI)* sin (OV))

(8)

AI = acos (cos (RI) * cos (RV))

(9)

AV = atan (tan (RV) / sin (RI))

(10)

OI = asin (sin(RI) * cos (RV))

(11)

OV = atan (tan (RV) / cos (RI))

(12)

  1. AI = anatomic inclination; AV = anatomic version; OI = operative inclination; OV = operative version; RI = radiographic inclination; RV = radiographic version; formulas (2), (4), (6), (8), (10), and (12) are cited from Murray’s formulas [34].

Appendix 2. Converting Inclination and Anteversion Between the Anterior Pelvic Plane and the Coronal Plane [29]

A0 = arcsin (- cos (A1) * cos (I1) * sin (α) + sin (A1) * cos (α))

(13)

I0 = arcot (cot (I1) * cos (α) + sin (α) * tan (A1) / sin (I1))

(14)

  1. AP = pelvic tilt; when converting the anteversion from the anterior pelvic plane to the coronal plane, I0 and A0 are the inclination and anteversion on the coronal plane; I1 and A1 are the inclination and anteversion on the anterior pelvic plane; the α is positive for the anterior pelvic tilt and negative for the posterior pelvic tilt; when converting anteversion from the coronal plane to the anterior pelvic plane, I0 and A0 are the inclination and anteversion on the anterior pelvic plane; I1 and A1 are the inclination and anteversion on the coronal plane; the α is negative for the anterior pelvic tilt and positive for the posterior pelvic tilt.

About this article

Cite this article

Wan, Z., Malik, A., Jaramaz, B. et al. Imaging and Navigation Measurement of Acetabular Component Position in THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467, 32–42 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-008-0597-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-008-0597-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation