Skip to main content

Differences in range of motion with the same combined anteversion after total hip arthroplasty



We investigated the various impingement angles (including both bony and prosthetic impingement) and impingement types that can occur after THA, even when the same combined anteversion parameter is used. We also investigated the relationship between impingement angle and acetabular morphology or femoral anteversion.


We evaluated 83 patients with no hip arthritis. We divided them into six groups according to acetabular CE angle (≤15°, >15–≤25°, and >25°) and femoral anteversion (≤20° and >20°). Using three-dimensional templating software, we changed stem and cup anteversion to satisfy a combined anteversion (CA) of 50° in each hip (stem anteversion + cup anteversion = 50°) and investigated the resulting impingement angles.


Even with the same CA, differences in impingement angle occurred: 18.3° ± 7.2° with flexion, 30.2° ± 9.7° with internal rotation at 90° flexion, 20.2° ± 12.5° with extension, and 26.2° ± 7.8° with external rotation. As stem anteversion increased, the impingement type changed from prosthetic impingement to bony impingement in flexion and internal rotation and from bony impingement to prosthetic impingement in extension and external rotation. The flexion angle and internal rotation angle at 90° flexion increased (p < 0.016) as CE angle decreased. There were no significant differences between high and low femoral anteversion.


Combined anteversion theory should be used with care because of large differences in impingement angles. A stem anteversion of 30° and cup anteversion of 20° appear to be ideal for obtaining a larger impingement angle under this condition.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5


  1. Grinten M, Verhaar JAN (2003) Dislocation of total hip prostheses: risk factors and treatment. Ned Tijdschr Gen 147:286–290

    Google Scholar 

  2. Coventry MB (1985) Late dislocations in patients with Charnley total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:832–841

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R et al (1978) Dislocations after total hip replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60:217–220

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Masaoka T, Yamamoto K, Shishido T et al (2006) Study of hip joint dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 30:26–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nakashima Y, Hirata M, Akiyama M et al (2014) Combined anteversion technique reduced the dislocation in cementless total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 38:27–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kessler O, Patil S, Wirth S et al (2008) Bony impingement affects range of motion after total hip arthroplasty: A subject-specific approach. J Orthop Res 26:443–452

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Suzuki K, Matsubara M, Morita S et al (2002) CT image evaluation of the internal rotation limit prior to bony impingement after total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci 7:433–438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bartz RL, Nobel PC, Kadakia NR et al (2000) The effect of femoral component head size on posterior dislocation of the artificial hip joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82:1300–1307

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Inoue K, Wicart P, Kawasaki T et al (2000) Prevalence of hip osteoarthritis and acetabular dysplasia in french and japanese adults. Rheumatology 39:745–748

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E et al (1998) The morphology of the femur in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:711–719

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Australian Registry (2016) Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry annual report 2016. Accessed 02 October 2017

  14. The New Zealand Joint Registry (2016) New Zealand Orthopaedic Association 17 year report. Accessed 02 October 2017

  15. Ranawat CS, Maynard MJ (1991) Modern techniques of cemented total hip arthroplasty. Tech Orthop 6:17–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dorr LD, Malik A, Dastane M et al (2009) Combined anteversion technique for total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:119–127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fujishiro T, Hiranaka T, Hashimoto S et al (2016) The effect of acetabular and femoral component version on dislocation in primary total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 40:697–702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Shoji T, Yasunaga Y, Yamasaki T et al (2013) Bony impingement depends on the bone morphology of the hip after total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 37:1897–1903

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Iftach H, Lazaros P, Asheesh B et al (2013) Anterior inferior iliac spine morphology correlates with hip range of motion: a classification system and dynamic model. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:2497–2503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Shoji T, Yasunaga Y, Yamasaki T et al (2015) Low femoral antetorsion as a risk factor for bony impingement after bipolar hemiarthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res. Accessed 02 October 2017

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tamon Kabata.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ohmori, T., Kabata, T., Kajino, Y. et al. Differences in range of motion with the same combined anteversion after total hip arthroplasty. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 42, 1021–1028 (2018).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


  • Total hip arthroplasty
  • Same combined anteversion
  • Range of motion
  • Impingement