Aims. Patients with spinal pathology who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) have an increased risk of dislocation and revision. The aim of this study was to determine if the use of the Hip-Spine Classification system in these patients would result in a decreased rate of postoperative dislocation in patients with spinal pathology. Methods. This prospective, multicentre study evaluated 3,777 consecutive patients undergoing THA by three surgeons, between January 2014 and December 2019. They were categorized using The Hip-Spine Classification system: group 1 with normal spinal alignment; group 2 with a flatback deformity, group 2A with normal spinal mobility, and group 2B with a stiff spine. Flatback deformity was defined by a pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis of > 10°, and spinal stiffness was defined by < 10° change in sacral slope from standing to seated. Each category determined a patient-specific component positioning. Survivorship free of dislocation was recorded and spinopelvic measurements were compared for reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient. Results. A total of 2,081 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 987 group 1A, 232 group 1B, 715 group 2A, and 147 group 2B patients. A total of 70 patients had a lumbar fusion, most had L4-5 (16; 23%) or L4-S1 (12; 17%) fusions; 51 patients (73%) had one or two levels fused, and 19 (27%) had > three levels fused. Dual mobility (DM) components were used in 166 patients (8%), including all of those in group 2B and with > three level fusions. Survivorship free of dislocation at five years was 99.2% with a 0.8% dislocation rate. The correlation coefficient was 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 0.91). Conclusion. This is the largest series in the literature evaluating the relationship between hip-spine pathology and dislocation after THA, and guiding appropriate treatment. The Hip-Spine Classification system allows surgeons to make appropriate evaluations preoperatively, and it guides the use of DM components in patients with spinopelvic pathology in order to reduce the risk of dislocation in these high-risk patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):17–24

Understanding spinopelvic mechanics is important for the success of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite significant advancements in appreciating spinopelvic balance, numerous challenges remain. It is crucial to recognize the individual variability and postoperative changes in spinopelvic parameters and their consequential impact on prosthetic component positioning to mitigate the risk of dislocation and enhance postoperative outcomes. This review describes the integration of advanced diagnostic approaches, enhanced technology, implant considerations, and surgical planning, all tailored to the unique anatomy and biomechanics of each patient. It underscores the importance of accurately predicting postoperative spinopelvic mechanics, selecting suitable imaging techniques, establishing a consistent nomenclature for spinopelvic stiffness, and considering implant-specific strategies. Furthermore, it highlights the potential of artificial intelligence to personalize care.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(11):1206–1215.

In 2021, Vigdorchik et al. published a large multicentre study validating their simple Hip-Spine Classification for determining patient-specific acetabular component positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of our study was to apply this Hip-Spine Classification to a sample of Australian patients undergoing THA surgery to determine the local acetabular component positioning requirements. Additionally, we propose a modified algorithm for adjusting cup anteversion requirements. 790 patients who underwent THA surgery between January 2021 and June 2022 were assessed for anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPt) and sacral slope (SS) in standing and relaxed seated positions and categorized according to their spinal stiffness and flatback deformity. Spinal stiffness was measured using pelvic mobility (PM); the ΔSS between standing and relaxed seated. Flatback deformity was defined by APPt <-13° in standing. As in Vigdorchik et al., PM of <10° was considered a stiff spine. For our algorithm, PM of <20° indicated the need for increased cup anteversion. Using this approach, patient-specific cup anteversion is increased by 1° for every degree the patient's PM is <20°. According to the Vigdorchik simple Hip-Spine classification groups, we found: 73% Group 1A, 19% Group 1B, 5% Group 2A, and 3% Group 2B. Therefore, under this classification, 27% of Australian THA patients would have an elevated risk of dislocation due to spinal deformity and/or stiffness. Under our modified definition, 52% patients would require increased cup anteversion to address spinal stiffness. The Hip-Spine Classification is a simple algorithm that has been shown to indicate to surgeons when adjustments to acetabular cup anteversion are required to account for spinal stiffness or flatback deformity. We investigated this algorithm in an Australian population of patients undergoing THA and propose a modified approach: increasing cup anteversion by 1° for every degree the patient's PM is <20°

Adverse spinopelvic characteristics (ASC) have been associated with increased dislocation risk following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). A stiff lumbar spine, a large posterior standing tilt when standing and severe sagittal spinal deformity have been identified as key risk factors for instability. It has been reported that the rate of dislocation in patients with such ASC may be increased and some authors have recommended the use of dual mobility bearings or robotics to reduce instability to within acceptable rates (<2%). The aims of the prospective study were to 1: Describe the true incidence of ASC in patients presenting for a THA 2. Assess whether such characteristics are associated with greater symptoms pre-THA due to the concomitant dual pathology of hip and spine and 3. Describe the early term dislocation rate with the use of ≤36mm bearings. This is an IRB-approved, two-center, multi-surgeon, prospective, consecutive, cohort study of 220 patients undergoing THA through anterolateral- (n=103; 46.8%), direct anterior- (n=104; 27.3%) or posterior- approaches (n=13; 5.9%). The mean age was 63.8±12.0 years (range: 27.7-89.0 years) and the mean BMI 28.0±5.0 kg/m. 2. (range: 19.4-44.4 kg/m. 2. ). There were 44 males (47.8%) and 48 females (52.2%). The mean follow-up was 1.6±0.5 years. Overall, 54% of femoral heads was 32 mm, and 46% was 36mm. All participants underwent lateral spinopelvic radiographs in the standing and deep-flexed seated positions were taken to determine lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic-femoral angle (PFA) and pelvic incidence (PI) in both positions. Spinal stiffness was defined as lumbar flexion <20° when transitioning between the standing and deep-seated position; adverse standing PT was defined as >19° and adverse sagittal lumbar balance was defined as mismatch between standing PI and LL >10°. Pre-operative patient reported outcomes was measured using the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and EuroQol Five-Dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D). Dislocation rates were prospectively recorded. Non-parametric tests were used, significance was set at p<0.05. The prevalence of PI-LL mismatch was 22.1% (43/195) and 30.4% had increased standing PT (59/194). The prevalence of lumbar stiffness was 3.5% (5/142) and these patients had all three adverse spinopelvic characteristics (5/142; 3.5%). There was no significant difference in the pre-operative OHS between patients with (20.7±7.6) and patients without adverse spinopelvic characteristics (21.6±8.7; p=0.721), nor was there for pre-operative EQ5D (0.651±0.081 vs. 0.563±0.190; p=0.295). Two patients sustained a dislocation (0.9%): One in the lateral (no ASC) and one in the posterior approaches, who also exhibited ASC pre-operatively. Sagittal lumbar imbalance, increased standing spinal tilt and spinal stiffness are not uncommon among patients undergoing THA. The presence of such characteristics is not associated with inferior pre-operative PROMs. However, when all characteristics are present, the risk of instability is increased. Patients with ASC treated with posterior approach THA may benefit from the use of advanced technology due to a high risk of dislocation. The use of such technology with the anterior or lateral approach to improve instability is to date unjustified as the rate of instability is low even amongst patients with ASCs

Background. The majority of adults will experience an episode of low back pain during their life. Patients with non-specific low back pain and lumbar disc degeneration (LDD) may experience spinal pain and morning stiffness because of a comparable inflammatory process as in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee and/or hip. Therefore, this study assessed the association between spinal morning stiffness, LDD and systemic inflammation in middle aged and elderly patients with low back pain. Methods. This cross-sectional study used the baseline data of the BACE study, including patients aged ≥55 years visiting a general practitioner with a new episode of back pain. The association between spinal morning stiffness, the radiographic features of lumbar disc degeneration and systemic inflammation measured with serum C-reactive protein was assessed with multivariable logistic regression models. Results. At baseline, a total of 661 back pain patients were included. Mean age was 66 years (SD 8), 416 (63%) reported spinal morning stiffness and 108 (16%) showed signs of systemic inflammation measured with CRP. Both LDD definitions were significantly associated with spinal morning stiffness (osteophytes OR=1.5 95% CI 1.1–2.1, narrowing OR=1.7 95% CI 1.2–2.4) and spinal morning stiffness >30 minutes (osteophytes OR=1.9 95% CI 1.2–3.0, narrowing OR=3.0 95% CI 1.7–5.2) For severity of disc space narrowing we found a clear dose response relationship with spinal morning stiffness. We found no associations between spinal morning stiffness and the features of LDD with systemic inflammation. Conclusions. This study demonstrated an association between the presence and duration of spinal morning stiffness and radiographic LDD features. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained

Abstract. Objectives. Spinal stiffness and flexibility terms are typically evaluated from linear regression of experimental data and are then assembled into 36-element matrices. Summarising in vitro test results in this manner is quick, computationally cheap and has the distinct advantage of outputting simple characteristic values which make it easy to compare results. However, this method disregards many important experimental features such as stiffening effects, neutral and elastic zones magnitudes, extent of asymmetry and energy dissipation (hysteresis). Alternatives to the linear least squares method include polynomials, separation of the load-displacement behaviour into the neutral and elastic zones using various deterministic methods and variations on the double sigmoid and Boltzmann curve fits. While all these methods have their advantages, none provide a comprehensive and complete characterisation of the load-displacement behaviour of spine specimens. In 1991, Panjabi demonstrated that the flexion-extension and mediolateral bending behaviour of functional spinal units could be approximated using the viscoelastic model consisting of a nonlinear spring in series with a linear Kelvin element. Nowadays viscoelastic models are mainly used to describe creep and stress relaxation, rather than for cyclic loading. The aim of this study was to conclusively prove the viscoelastic nature of spinal behaviour subject to cyclic loading. Being able to describe the behaviour of spine specimens using springs and dampers would yield characterising coefficients with recognisable physical meaning, thus providing an advantage over existing techniques. Methods. Six porcine isolated spinal disc specimens (ISDs) were tested under position and load control. Visual inspection of the load-displacement graphs from which the principal terms of the stiffness and flexibility matrices are derived suggest that the load-displacement behaviour could be idealised by a nonlinear spring system with damping. It was hypothesised that the contributions arising from non-linear spring-like behaviour and damping could be separated for each of the principal load-displacement graphs. Results. The principal elements from position and load control tests were plotted with load on the vertical axis and displacement on the horizontal axis, and a polynomial representing spring force was fitted to the data. This polynomial was subtracted from the experimental data. The remainder - representing damping force - was plotted against displacement and velocity and compared to idealised plots for different types of damping behaviour. Applying this reasoning to the six principal load-displacement plots obtained from stiffness and flexibility tests revealed that four of six exhibit behaviour which is a combination of a nonlinear hardening spring and viscous damper. However, for flexion-extension and mediolateral bending, the damping behaviour is more akin to coulomb damping with viscous influences, characterised by a steep central linear region and near horizontal regions at the extremes. These trends were common amongst all six specimens within the study sample size. Conclusions. The unique approach described here has allowed the characterisation of the load-displacement behaviour of ISDs in terms of characteristic mass-spring-damper systems. This is an important development which allows experimental findings to be framed in terms of mechanical contributions to a given load-displacement behaviour. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Introduction. Limb-length discrepancy (LLD) is a common postoperative complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study focuses on the correlation between patients’ perception of LLD after THA and the anatomical and functional leg length, pelvic and knee alignments and foot height. Previous publications have explored this topic in patients without significant spinal pathology or previous spine or lower extremity surgery. The objective of this work is to verify if the results are the same in case of stiff or fused spine. Methods. 170 patients with stiff spine (less than 10° L1-S1 lordosis variation between standing and sitting) were evaluated minimum 1 year after unilateral primary THA implantation using EOS® images in standing position (46/170 had previous lumbar fusion). We excluded cases with previous lower limbs surgery or frontal and sagittal spinal imbalance. 3D measures were performed to evaluate femoral and tibial length, femoral offset, pelvic obliquity, hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), knee flexion/hyperextension angle, tibial and femoral rotation. Axial pelvic rotation was measured as the angle between the line through the centers of the hips and the EOS x-ray beam source. The distance between middle of the tibial plafond and the ground was used to investigate the height of the foot. For data with normal distribution, paired Student's t-test and independent sample t-test were used for analysis. Univariate logistic regression was used to determine the correlation between the perception of limb length discrepancy and different variables. Multiple logistic regression was used to investigate the correlation between the patient perception of LLD and variables found significant in the univariate analysis. Significance level was set at 0.05. Results. Anatomical femoral length correlated with patients’ perception of LLD but other variables were significant (the height of the foot, sagittal and frontal knee alignment, pelvic obliquity and pelvic rotation more than 10°). Interestingly some factors induced an unexpected perception of LLD despite a non-significant femoral length discrepancy less than 1cm (pelvic rotation and obliquity, height of the foot). Conclusions. LLD is a multifactorial problem. This study showed that the anatomical femoral length as the factor that can be modified with THA technique or choice of prosthesis is not the only important factor. A comprehensive clinical and radiological evaluation is necessary preoperatively to investigate spinal stiffness, pelvic obliquity and rotation, sagittal and coronal knee alignment and foot deformity in these patients. Our study has limitations as we do not have preoperative EOS measurements for all patients. We cannot assess changes in leg length as a result of THA. We also did not investigate the degree of any foot deformities as flat foot deformity may potentially affect the patients perception of the leg length. Instead, we measured the distance between the medial malleolus and ground that can reflect the foot arch height. More cases must be included to evaluate the potential influence of pelvis anatomy and functional orientation (pelvic incidence, sacral slope and pelvic tilt) but this study points out that spinal stiffness significantly decreases the LLD tolerance previously reported in patients without degenerative stiffness or fusion

Introduction. Patients with reduced lumbar spine mobility are at higher risk of dislocation after THA as their hips have to compensate for spinal stiffness. Therefore our study aimed to 1) Define the optimal protocol for identifying patients with mobile hips and stiff lumbar spines and 2) Determine clinical and standing radiographic parameters predicting high hip and reduced lumbar spine mobility. Methods. This prospective diagnostic cohort study followed 113 consecutive patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis (OA) awaiting THA. Radiographic measurements were performed for the lumbar lordosis angle, pelvic tilt and pelvic-femoral angle on lateral radiographs in the standing, ‘relaxed-seated’ and ‘deep-seated’ (i.e. torso maximally leaning forward) position. A “hip user index” was calculated in order to quantify the contribution of the hip joint to the overall sagittal movement performed by the femur, pelvis and lumbar spine. Results. Radiographs in the relaxed-seated position had an accuracy of 56% (95%CI:46–65%) to detect patients with stiff lumbar spines, compared to a detected rate of 100% in the deep-seated position. The mean ‘hip user index’ was 63±12% and ten patients (9%) were hip users, having an index of 80% or more. A standing pelvic tilt of ≥18.5° was the only predictor for being a hip user with a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 71% (AUC 0.83). Patients with a standing pelvic tilt ≥18.5° and an unbalanced spine with a flatback deformity had a 30xfold relative risk (95%-CI:4–226; p<0.001) of being a hip user. Conclusion. Patients awaiting THA and having high hip and reduced lumbar spine mobility can be screened for with lateral standing radiographs of the spinopelvic complex and a thorough clinical examination. If the initial screening is positive, radiographs in the deep-seated position allow for better identification of patients being ‘hip users’ compared to radiographs in the relaxed-seated position

Aims

Spinopelvic pathology increases the risk for instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA), yet few studies have evaluated how pathology varies with age or sex. The aims of this study were: 1) to report differences in spinopelvic parameters with advancing age and between the sexes; and 2) to determine variation in the prevalence of THA instability risk factors with advancing age.

Aims

Precise implant positioning, tailored to individual spinopelvic biomechanics and phenotype, is paramount for stability in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite a few studies on instability prediction, there is a notable gap in research utilizing artificial intelligence (AI). The objective of our pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility of developing an AI algorithm tailored to individual spinopelvic mechanics and patient phenotype for predicting impingement.

Aims

Pelvic incidence (PI) is a position-independent spinopelvic parameter traditionally used by spinal surgeons to determine spinal alignment. Its relevance to the arthroplasty surgeon in assessing patient risk for total hip arthroplasty (THA) instability preoperatively is unclear. This study was undertaken to investigate the significance of PI relative to other spinopelvic parameter risk factors for instability to help guide its clinical application.

The clinical presentation and treatment of 18 cases of osteoid osteoma or osteoblastoma of the spine are described, with an average follow-up of 4.2 years (range three months to 11.5 years). The average delay between the onset of symptoms and definitive diagnosis was 19 months. All patients presented with marked spinal stiffness and a painful scoliosis. The lesion was situated in the pedicle in the 15 patients with involvement of the thoracolumbar spine. A surgical approach allowing direct access to the pedicle without entering the spinal canal or jeopardising spinal stability is described. Surgical treatment afforded immediate relief of pain and an early return of full spinal mobility

1. Thirty-four patients with severe lumbo-sacral subluxation have been studied. Twenty-nine of these came for advice between the ages of nine and nineteen, and of these, twenty-five developed symptoms and signs of a characteristic syndrome. 2. The details of the syndrome are described: the essential features are spinal stiffness, a lordotic gait, resistance to straight leg raising, and in some cases evidence of interference with cauda equina or nerve root. 3. The danger of attempted reduction by traction is stressed, as well as the difficulties to be encountered during posterior lumbo-sacral fusion. 4. The reasons for operating are given; the results of spinal fusion were satisfactory. 5. The traditional apprehension concerning the effect of severe subluxation on childbirth has probably been over-stressed. 6. The tendency to slip was almost completely arrested by spinal fusion

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with early-onset scoliosis (EOS), who had undergone spinal fusion after distraction-based spinal growth modulation using either traditional growing rods (TGRs) or magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGRs).

Aims

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients undergoing or having a prior lumbar spine fusion (LSF) have an increased risk of mechanical complications. The aim of this registry-based, retrospective comparative cohort study is to assess the longer term survival of THA in patients who have undergone a LSF during a 17-year period (2000 to 2017).

Aims

While previously underappreciated, factors related to the spine contribute substantially to the risk of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). These factors must be taken into consideration during preoperative planning for revision THA due to recurrent instability. We developed a protocol to assess the functional position of the spine, the significance of these findings, and how to address different pathologies at the time of revision THA.

Aims

Magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR) have been gaining popularity in the management of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) over the past decade. We present our experience with the first 44 MCGR consecutive cases treated at our institution.

There remains confusion in the literature with regard to the spinopelvic relationship, and its contribution to ideal acetabular component position. Critical assessment of the literature has been limited by use of conflicting terminology and definitions of new concepts that further confuse the topic. In 2017, the concept of a Hip-Spine Workgroup was created with the first meeting held at the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons Annual Meeting in 2018. The goal of this workgroup was to first help standardize terminology across the literature so that as a topic, multiple groups could produce literature that is immediately understandable and applicable. This consensus review from the Hip-Spine Workgroup aims to simplify the spinopelvic relationship, offer hip surgeons a concise summary of available literature, and select common terminology approved by both hip surgeons and spine surgeons for future research.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:808–816.