Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research (Dec 2021)
The morphology of the proximal femur in cementless short-stem total hip arthroplasty: No negative effect on offset reconstruction, leg length difference and implant positioning
Abstract
Abstract Background Correct reconstruction of hip offset (HO) and leg length are important for clinical–functional outcome and patient satisfaction in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The morphology of the proximal femur can pose a risk for increased leg length difference (LLD) in cementless straight-stem THA. We therefore wanted to evaluate, if this is also applicable in THA with a cementless meta-diaphyseal short stem. Methods In a retrospective study, 106 patients (index surgery 2014–2019) with unilateral THA and a morphologically healthy hip as a reference (Kellgren–Lawrence ≤ 1) were included. The same cementless short stem with meta-diaphyseal fixation and cementless press-fit cup was implanted. The proximal femur was rated by Dorr’s classification, and subgroups were formed afterward. Measurements were carried out on preoperative and 3 months postoperative anterior–posterior radiographs of the pelvis. Kruskal–Wallis test, Fisher’s exact test and binary logistic regression were performed to evaluate the influence of the anatomical shape on postoperative leg length difference and offset reconstruction. Results The Dorr type did not show any significance influence on LLD (p = 0.532), or postoperative difference in femoral offset (p = 0.243), acetabular offset (p = 0.106) and hip offset (p = 0.698). Stem alignment (p = 0.705) and canal fill indices (CFI I: p = 0.321; CFI II: p = 0.411; CFI III: p = 0.478) were also without significant differences. Logistic regression did not show any significant increased risk for a LLD ≥ 5 mm or ≥ 10 mm as well as HO ≥ 5 mm or ≥ 10 mm. Conclusion Reconstruction of hip offset and postoperative leg length difference is not negatively influenced by Dorr type, canal flare index, cortical index and canal-to-calcar ratio in cementless short-stem THA. Implant positioning and canal fill are also not negatively affected by the anatomical shape of the proximal femur. Level of evidence: Level IV.
Keywords