Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bony Impingement Limits Design-related Increases in Hip Range of Motion

  • Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Hip Society
  • Published:
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Abstract

Background

Factors affecting risk for impingement and dislocation can be related to the patient, implant design, or surgeon. While these have been studied independently, the impact of each factor relative to the others is not known.

Questions/purposes

We determined the effect of three implant design factors, prosthetic placement, and patient anatomy on subject-specific ROM.

Methods

We virtually implanted hip geometry obtained from 16 CT scans using computer models of hip components with differences in head size, neck diameter, and neck-shaft angle. A contact detection model computed ROM before prosthetic or bony impingement. We correlated anatomic measurements from pelvic radiographs with ROM.

Results

When we implanted the components for best fit to the subject’s anatomy or in the recommended orientation of 45° abduction and 20° anteversion, ROM was greater than 110° of flexion, 30° of extension, 45° of adduction-abduction, and 40° of external rotation. Changes in head size, neck diameter, and neck-shaft angle generated small gains (3.6°–6°) in ROM when analyzed individually, but collectively, we noted a more substantial increase (10°–17°). Radiographic measurements correlated only moderately with hip flexion and abduction.

Conclusions

It is feasible to tailor implant placement to each patient to maximize bony coverage without compromising ROM. Once bony impingement becomes the restricting factor, further changes in implant design may not improve ROM. Radiographic measurements do not appear to have value in predicting ROM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5A–E
Fig. 6A–B

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bader R, Scholz R, Steinhauser E, Zimmermann S, Busch R, Mittelmeier W. The influence of head and neck geometry on stability of total hip replacement: a mechanical test study. Acta Orthop Scand. 2004;75:415–421.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Barrack RL, Butler RA, Laster DR, Andrews P. Stem design and dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: clinical results and computer modeling. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16:8–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bartz RL, Nobel PC, Kadakia NR, Tullos HS. The effect of femoral component head size on posterior dislocation of the artificial hip joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:1300–1307.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Berry DJ, von Knoch M, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS. Effect of femoral head diameter and operative approach on risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2456–2463.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Burroughs BR, Hallstrom B, Golladay GJ, Hoeffel D, Harris WH. Range of motion and stability in total hip arthroplasty with 28-, 32-, 38-, and 44-mm femoral head sizes. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:11–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chandler DR, Glousman R, Hull D, McGuire PJ, Kim IS, Clarke IC, Sarmiento A. Prosthetic hip range of motion and impingement: the effects of head and neck geometry. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;166:284–291.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chee YH, Teoh KH, Sabnis BM, Ballantyne JA, Brenkel IJ. Total hip replacement in morbidly obese patients with osteoarthritis: results of a prospectively matched study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:1066–1071.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Crowninshield RD, Maloney WJ, Wentz DH, Humphrey SM, Blanchard CR. Biomechanics of large femoral heads: what they do and don’t do. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:102–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Daly PJ, Morrey BF. Operative correction of an unstable total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74:1334–1343.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Davis KE, Ritter MA, Berend ME, Meding JB. The importance of range of motion after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;465:180–184.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. D’Lima DD, Urquhart AG, Buehler KO, Walker RH, Colwell CW Jr. The effect of the orientation of the acetabular and femoral components on the range of motion of the hip at different head-neck ratios. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:315–321.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dorr LD, Wan Z. Causes of and treatment protocol for instability of total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;355:144–151.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eskelinen A, Helenius I, Remes V, Ylinen P, Tallroth K, Paavilainen T. Cementless total hip arthroplasty in patients with high congenital hip dislocation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:80–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fackler CD, Poss R. Dislocation in total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;151:169–178.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fowble VA, dela Rosa MA, Schmalzried TP. A comparison of total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty—patients and outcomes. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67:108–112.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Grant JA, Viens N, Bolognesi MP, Olson SA, Cook CE. Two-year outcomes in primary THA in obese male veterans administration medical center patients. Rheumatol Int. 2008;28:1105–1109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grigoris P, Grecula MJ, Amstutz HC. Tripolar hip replacement for recurrent prosthetic dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;304:148–155.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hedlundh U, Ahnfelt L, Hybbinette CH. Dislocations and the femoral head size in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;333:226–233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hernigou P, Filippini P, Flouzat-Lachaniette CH, Batista SU, Poignard A. Constrained liner in neurologic or cognitively impaired patients undergoing primary THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:3255–3262.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Howie CR, Ohly NE, Miller B. Cemented total hip arthroplasty with subtrochanteric osteotomy in dysplastic hips. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:3240–3247.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Imai H, Mashima N, Takahashi T, Yamamoto H. The relationship between increased hip range of motion, wear, and locking mechanism failure in the Harris-Galante acetabular component. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:892–897.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kessler O, Patil S, Stefan W, Mayr E, Colwell CW Jr, D’Lima DD. Bony impingement affects range of motion after total hip arthroplasty: a subject-specific approach. J Orthop Res. 2008;26:443–452.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kubiak-Langer M, Tannast M, Murphy SB, Siebenrock KA, Langlotz F. Range of motion in anterior femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;458:117–124.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Le Duff MJ, Wisk LE, Amstutz HC. Range of motion after stemmed total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing—a clinical study. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67:177–181.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lubbeke A, Stern R, Garavaglia G, Zurcher L, Hoffmeyer P. Differences in outcomes of obese women and men undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:327–334.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mai K, Hardwick ME, Walker RH, Copp SN, Ezzet KA, Colwell CW Jr. Early dislocation rate in ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty. HSS J. 2008;4:10–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mallory TH, Lombardi AV Jr, Fada RA, Herrington SM, Eberle RW. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty using the anterolateral abductor split approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;358:166–172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Matsushita I, Morita Y, Ito Y, Gejo R, Kimura T. Activities of daily living after total hip arthroplasty: is a 32-mm femoral head superior to a 26-mm head for improving daily activities? Int Orthop. 2011;35:25–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McCollum DE, Gray WJ. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: causes and prevention. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;261:159–170.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. McGrory BJ, Freiberg AA, Shinar AA, Harris WH. Correlation of measured range of hip motion following total hip arthroplasty and responses to a questionnaire. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11:565–571.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Miki H, Yamanashi W, Nishii T, Sato Y, Yoshikawa H, Sugano N. Anatomic hip range of motion after implantation during total hip arthroplasty as measured by a navigation system. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:946–952.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Morrey BF. Instability after total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 1992;23:237–248.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Nadzadi ME, Pedersen DR, Yack HJ, Callaghan JJ, Brown TD. Kinematics, kinetics, and finite element analysis of commonplace maneuvers at risk for total hip dislocation. J Biomech. 2003;36:577–591.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Padgett DE, Lipman J, Robie B, Nestor BJ. Influence of total hip design on dislocation: a computer model and clinical analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;447:48–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Paterno SA, Lachiewicz PF, Kelley SS. The influence of patient-related factors and the position of the acetabular component on the rate of dislocation after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79:1202–1210.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Petrella AJ, Stowe JQ, D’Lima DD, Rullkoetter PJ, Laz PJ. Computer-assisted versus manual alignment in THA: a probabilistic approach to range of motion. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:50–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Seel MJ, Hafez MA, Eckman K, Jaramaz B, Davidson D, DiGioia AM 3rd. Three-dimensional planning and virtual radiographs in revision total hip arthroplasty for instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;442:35–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Seki M, Yuasa N, Ohkuni K. Analysis of optimal range of socket orientations in total hip arthroplasty with use of computer-aided design simulation. J Orthop Res. 1998;16:513–517.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Sun H, Inaoka H, Fukuoka Y, Masuda T, Ishida A, Morita S. Range of motion measurement of an artificial hip joint using CT images. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2007;45:1229–1235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Thillemann TM, Pedersen AB, Johnsen SP, Soballe K. Implant survival after primary total hip arthroplasty due to childhood hip disorders: results from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:769–776.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Trudelle-Jackson E, Emerson R, Smith S. Outcomes of total hip arthroplasty: a study of patients one year postsurgery. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2002;32:260–267.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Turner RS. Postoperative total hip prosthetic femoral head dislocations: incidence, etiologic factors, and management. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;301:196–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Weeden SH, Paprosky WG, Bowling JW. The early dislocation rate in primary total hip arthroplasty following the posterior approach with posterior soft-tissue repair. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:709–713.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. White RE Jr, Forness TJ, Allman JK, Junick DW. Effect of posterior capsular repair on early dislocation in primary total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;393:163–167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Woo RY, Morrey BF. Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64:1295–1306.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Wu G, Siegler S, Allard P, Kirtley C, Leardini A, Rosenbaum D, Whittle M, D’Lima DD, Cristofolini L, Witte H, Schmid O, Stokes I; Standardization and Terminology Committee of the International Society of Biomechanics. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion. Part I. Ankle, hip, and spine. International Society of Biomechanics. J Biomech. 2002;35:543–548.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Yuan L, Shih C. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1999;119:263–266.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Zijlstra WP, van den Akker-Scheek I, Zee MJ, van Raay JJ. No clinical difference between large metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty and 28-mm-head total hip arthroplasty? Int Orthop. 2011 March 4 [Epub ahead of print].

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Shiley Center for Orthopaedic Research and Education at Scripps Clinic, 11025 North Torrey Pines Road, Suite 200, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA

    Adam Bunn BS, Clifford W. Colwell Jr MD & Darryl D. D’Lima MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Adam Bunn BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Clifford W. Colwell Jr MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Darryl D. D’Lima MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Darryl D. D’Lima MD, PhD.

Additional information

Each author certifies that he or she, or a member of their immediate family, has no commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research neither advocates nor endorses the use of any treatment, drug, or device. Readers are encouraged to always seek additional information, including FDA approval status, of any drug or the device before clinical use.

Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the human protocol for this investigation, that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained.

About this article

Cite this article

Bunn, A., Colwell, C.W. & D’Lima, D.D. Bony Impingement Limits Design-related Increases in Hip Range of Motion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470, 418–427 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2096-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2096-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation