Effect of intraoperative treatment options on hip joint stability following total hip arthroplasty

Dislocation remains the leading indication for revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of this study was to use a computational model to compare the overall resistance to both anterior and posterior dislocation for the available THA constructs commonly considered by surgeons attempti...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of orthopaedic research 2022-03, Vol.40 (3), p.604-613
Hauptverfasser: Myers, Casey A., Huff, Daniel N., Mason, J. Bohannon, Rullkoetter, Paul J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 613
container_issue 3
container_start_page 604
container_title Journal of orthopaedic research
container_volume 40
creator Myers, Casey A.
Huff, Daniel N.
Mason, J. Bohannon
Rullkoetter, Paul J.
description Dislocation remains the leading indication for revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of this study was to use a computational model to compare the overall resistance to both anterior and posterior dislocation for the available THA constructs commonly considered by surgeons attempting to produce a stable joint. Patient‐specific musculoskeletal models of THA patients performing activities consistent with anterior and posterior dislocation were developed to calculate joint contact forces and joint positions used for simulations of dislocation in a finite element model of the implanted hip that included an experimentally calibrated hip capsule representation. Dislocations were then performed with consideration of offset using +5 and +9 offset, iteratively with three lipped liner variations in jump distance (10°, 15°, and 20° lips), a size 40 head, and a dual‐mobility construct. Dislocation resistance was quantified as the moment required to dislocate the hip and the integral of the moment‐flexion angle (dislocation energy). Increasing head diameter increased resistive moment on average for anterior and posterior dislocation by 22% relative to a neutral configuration. A lipped liner resulted in increases in the resistive moment to posterior dislocation of 9%, 19%, and 47% for 10°, 15°, and 20° lips, a sensitivity of approximately 2.8 Nm/mm of additional jump distance. A dual‐mobility acetabular design resulted in an average 38% increase in resistive moment and 92% increase in dislocation energy for anterior and posterior dislocation. A quantitative understanding of tradeoffs in the dislocation risk inherent to THA construct options is valuable in supporting surgical decision making.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/jor.25055
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2520881609</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2520881609</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3605-c343330d6e1c63bea15e21f88dba08107a3b2fc1315274e76877876bdf5416983</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LwzAYgIMobk4P_gHJUQ_d8tGk2VHG_GIwEAVvJW0Tl5E2Nckc_ffWVb15ed_D-_DA-wBwidEUI0RmW-enhCHGjsAYM5YmjGRvx2CMMsoTRDgfgbMQtgihDBNxCkaUzonggoxBsdRalRE6DU0TvXSt8jKaTwWjVzLWqulvbTSuCdA1cGNauHU9CUOUhbEmdlA7a93eNO8wuijtgZE-brxrrQyxOwcnWtqgLn72BLzeLV8WD8lqff-4uF0lJeWI9TOllKKKK1xyWiiJmSJYC1EVEgmMMkkLoktMcf9dqjIuskxkvKg0SzGfCzoB14O39e5jp0LMaxNKZa1slNuFnDCChMAczXv0ZkBL70LwSuetN7X0XY5R_p0075Pmh6Q9e_Wj3RW1qv7I34Y9MBuAvbGq-9-UP62fB-UXIjuBcQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2520881609</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of intraoperative treatment options on hip joint stability following total hip arthroplasty</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><creator>Myers, Casey A. ; Huff, Daniel N. ; Mason, J. Bohannon ; Rullkoetter, Paul J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Myers, Casey A. ; Huff, Daniel N. ; Mason, J. Bohannon ; Rullkoetter, Paul J.</creatorcontrib><description>Dislocation remains the leading indication for revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of this study was to use a computational model to compare the overall resistance to both anterior and posterior dislocation for the available THA constructs commonly considered by surgeons attempting to produce a stable joint. Patient‐specific musculoskeletal models of THA patients performing activities consistent with anterior and posterior dislocation were developed to calculate joint contact forces and joint positions used for simulations of dislocation in a finite element model of the implanted hip that included an experimentally calibrated hip capsule representation. Dislocations were then performed with consideration of offset using +5 and +9 offset, iteratively with three lipped liner variations in jump distance (10°, 15°, and 20° lips), a size 40 head, and a dual‐mobility construct. Dislocation resistance was quantified as the moment required to dislocate the hip and the integral of the moment‐flexion angle (dislocation energy). Increasing head diameter increased resistive moment on average for anterior and posterior dislocation by 22% relative to a neutral configuration. A lipped liner resulted in increases in the resistive moment to posterior dislocation of 9%, 19%, and 47% for 10°, 15°, and 20° lips, a sensitivity of approximately 2.8 Nm/mm of additional jump distance. A dual‐mobility acetabular design resulted in an average 38% increase in resistive moment and 92% increase in dislocation energy for anterior and posterior dislocation. A quantitative understanding of tradeoffs in the dislocation risk inherent to THA construct options is valuable in supporting surgical decision making.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0736-0266</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1554-527X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jor.25055</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33928682</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Acetabulum - surgery ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods ; dislocation ; hip arthroplasty ; Hip Dislocation ; Hip Joint - surgery ; Hip Prosthesis ; Humans ; Joint Dislocations ; joint mechanics ; Prosthesis Design ; Prosthesis Failure ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Reoperation</subject><ispartof>Journal of orthopaedic research, 2022-03, Vol.40 (3), p.604-613</ispartof><rights>2021 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC</rights><rights>2021 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3605-c343330d6e1c63bea15e21f88dba08107a3b2fc1315274e76877876bdf5416983</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3605-c343330d6e1c63bea15e21f88dba08107a3b2fc1315274e76877876bdf5416983</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3663-9167</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjor.25055$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjor.25055$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,1433,27924,27925,45574,45575,46409,46833</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33928682$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Myers, Casey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huff, Daniel N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mason, J. Bohannon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rullkoetter, Paul J.</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of intraoperative treatment options on hip joint stability following total hip arthroplasty</title><title>Journal of orthopaedic research</title><addtitle>J Orthop Res</addtitle><description>Dislocation remains the leading indication for revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of this study was to use a computational model to compare the overall resistance to both anterior and posterior dislocation for the available THA constructs commonly considered by surgeons attempting to produce a stable joint. Patient‐specific musculoskeletal models of THA patients performing activities consistent with anterior and posterior dislocation were developed to calculate joint contact forces and joint positions used for simulations of dislocation in a finite element model of the implanted hip that included an experimentally calibrated hip capsule representation. Dislocations were then performed with consideration of offset using +5 and +9 offset, iteratively with three lipped liner variations in jump distance (10°, 15°, and 20° lips), a size 40 head, and a dual‐mobility construct. Dislocation resistance was quantified as the moment required to dislocate the hip and the integral of the moment‐flexion angle (dislocation energy). Increasing head diameter increased resistive moment on average for anterior and posterior dislocation by 22% relative to a neutral configuration. A lipped liner resulted in increases in the resistive moment to posterior dislocation of 9%, 19%, and 47% for 10°, 15°, and 20° lips, a sensitivity of approximately 2.8 Nm/mm of additional jump distance. A dual‐mobility acetabular design resulted in an average 38% increase in resistive moment and 92% increase in dislocation energy for anterior and posterior dislocation. A quantitative understanding of tradeoffs in the dislocation risk inherent to THA construct options is valuable in supporting surgical decision making.</description><subject>Acetabulum - surgery</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods</subject><subject>dislocation</subject><subject>hip arthroplasty</subject><subject>Hip Dislocation</subject><subject>Hip Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Hip Prosthesis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint Dislocations</subject><subject>joint mechanics</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Prosthesis Failure</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular</subject><subject>Reoperation</subject><issn>0736-0266</issn><issn>1554-527X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LwzAYgIMobk4P_gHJUQ_d8tGk2VHG_GIwEAVvJW0Tl5E2Nckc_ffWVb15ed_D-_DA-wBwidEUI0RmW-enhCHGjsAYM5YmjGRvx2CMMsoTRDgfgbMQtgihDBNxCkaUzonggoxBsdRalRE6DU0TvXSt8jKaTwWjVzLWqulvbTSuCdA1cGNauHU9CUOUhbEmdlA7a93eNO8wuijtgZE-brxrrQyxOwcnWtqgLn72BLzeLV8WD8lqff-4uF0lJeWI9TOllKKKK1xyWiiJmSJYC1EVEgmMMkkLoktMcf9dqjIuskxkvKg0SzGfCzoB14O39e5jp0LMaxNKZa1slNuFnDCChMAczXv0ZkBL70LwSuetN7X0XY5R_p0075Pmh6Q9e_Wj3RW1qv7I34Y9MBuAvbGq-9-UP62fB-UXIjuBcQ</recordid><startdate>202203</startdate><enddate>202203</enddate><creator>Myers, Casey A.</creator><creator>Huff, Daniel N.</creator><creator>Mason, J. Bohannon</creator><creator>Rullkoetter, Paul J.</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3663-9167</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202203</creationdate><title>Effect of intraoperative treatment options on hip joint stability following total hip arthroplasty</title><author>Myers, Casey A. ; Huff, Daniel N. ; Mason, J. Bohannon ; Rullkoetter, Paul J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3605-c343330d6e1c63bea15e21f88dba08107a3b2fc1315274e76877876bdf5416983</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Acetabulum - surgery</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods</topic><topic>dislocation</topic><topic>hip arthroplasty</topic><topic>Hip Dislocation</topic><topic>Hip Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Hip Prosthesis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint Dislocations</topic><topic>joint mechanics</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Prosthesis Failure</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular</topic><topic>Reoperation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Myers, Casey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huff, Daniel N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mason, J. Bohannon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rullkoetter, Paul J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of orthopaedic research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Myers, Casey A.</au><au>Huff, Daniel N.</au><au>Mason, J. Bohannon</au><au>Rullkoetter, Paul J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of intraoperative treatment options on hip joint stability following total hip arthroplasty</atitle><jtitle>Journal of orthopaedic research</jtitle><addtitle>J Orthop Res</addtitle><date>2022-03</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>604</spage><epage>613</epage><pages>604-613</pages><issn>0736-0266</issn><eissn>1554-527X</eissn><abstract>Dislocation remains the leading indication for revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of this study was to use a computational model to compare the overall resistance to both anterior and posterior dislocation for the available THA constructs commonly considered by surgeons attempting to produce a stable joint. Patient‐specific musculoskeletal models of THA patients performing activities consistent with anterior and posterior dislocation were developed to calculate joint contact forces and joint positions used for simulations of dislocation in a finite element model of the implanted hip that included an experimentally calibrated hip capsule representation. Dislocations were then performed with consideration of offset using +5 and +9 offset, iteratively with three lipped liner variations in jump distance (10°, 15°, and 20° lips), a size 40 head, and a dual‐mobility construct. Dislocation resistance was quantified as the moment required to dislocate the hip and the integral of the moment‐flexion angle (dislocation energy). Increasing head diameter increased resistive moment on average for anterior and posterior dislocation by 22% relative to a neutral configuration. A lipped liner resulted in increases in the resistive moment to posterior dislocation of 9%, 19%, and 47% for 10°, 15°, and 20° lips, a sensitivity of approximately 2.8 Nm/mm of additional jump distance. A dual‐mobility acetabular design resulted in an average 38% increase in resistive moment and 92% increase in dislocation energy for anterior and posterior dislocation. A quantitative understanding of tradeoffs in the dislocation risk inherent to THA construct options is valuable in supporting surgical decision making.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>33928682</pmid><doi>10.1002/jor.25055</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3663-9167</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0736-0266
ispartof Journal of orthopaedic research, 2022-03, Vol.40 (3), p.604-613
issn 0736-0266
1554-527X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2520881609
source MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)
subjects Acetabulum - surgery
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods
dislocation
hip arthroplasty
Hip Dislocation
Hip Joint - surgery
Hip Prosthesis
Humans
Joint Dislocations
joint mechanics
Prosthesis Design
Prosthesis Failure
Range of Motion, Articular
Reoperation
title Effect of intraoperative treatment options on hip joint stability following total hip arthroplasty
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T10%3A36%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20intraoperative%20treatment%20options%20on%20hip%20joint%20stability%20following%20total%20hip%20arthroplasty&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20orthopaedic%20research&rft.au=Myers,%20Casey%20A.&rft.date=2022-03&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=604&rft.epage=613&rft.pages=604-613&rft.issn=0736-0266&rft.eissn=1554-527X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jor.25055&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2520881609%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2520881609&rft_id=info:pmid/33928682&rfr_iscdi=true