Can Flexed-Seated and Single-Leg Standing Radiographs Be Useful in Preoperative Evaluation of Lumbar Mobility in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to determine whether simulated radiographs in the "flexed-seated" or "step-up" positions better demonstrate a patient's range of spinopelvic motion between standing and sitting positions than relaxed sitting and standing radiographs. METHODS: An institutional review board approved cohort of 43 patients with hip osteoarthritis whom underwent full body sitting-standing radiographs from August 2016 to December 2017 at a single institution was reviewed. Subjects underwent single-leg step-up standing and flexed-seated radiographs, and relaxed standing and sitting radiographs. Sacral slope, spinopelvic tilt (SPT), and lumbar lordosis were measured in all radiographs. Alignment parameters were compared between both sets of imaging, and the change in SPT between the imaging modalities was plotted and stratified by pre-existing lumbar pathology. RESULTS: There were significant differences between the relaxed standing and step-up radiographs and the relaxed and flexed-seated radiographs for sacral slope, SPT, and lumbar lordosis (P < .002 for all), with the exception of SPT in the relaxed and step-up standing postures (P = .110). When transitioning from the standing to sitting position, the mean changes in SPT differed significantly between both sets of radiographs. Most importantly, when plotting changes in SPT between flexed and relaxed sitting postures, patients with fusions and flatback deformity trended toward greater anterior pelvic tilting, a position of greater risk of posterior dislocation. CONCLUSION: Flexed sitting and single-leg standing imaging may emphasize the compensatory mechanisms of patients with concomitant hip and spine pathology more than relaxed imaging using our measurements. Our method may provide insight into high dislocation risk patients compared to the previously published hip measurement method. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
