Artículos de revistas
RESTORATION OF THE ROTATION CENTER IN MINIMALLY-INVASIVE TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT
Fecha
2009Registro en:
Acta Ortopédica Brasileira, v.17, n.2, p.14-17, 2009
1413-7852
Autor
VICENTE, Jose Ricardo Negreiros
CROCI, Alberto Tesconi
CAMARGO, Olavo Pires de
Institución
Resumen
Objective: Our aim was to evaluate the challenges in obtaining a successful restoration of the rotation center as well as a good positioning of the acetabular component when using the minimally-invasive posterior approach for uncemented total hip replacement. Methods: In a comparative non-random prospective study, 64 adult patients underwent elective total hip arthroplasty using the minimally-invasive posterior approach performed by one single surgeon, All patients included in this study had a superior and lateral migration of the rotation center of the hip in comparison to the normal contralateral hip. Patients were excluded from the study if they presented the following: diagnosis of femoral neck fracture, displasic hip types 2, 3 and 4 (Crowe`s classification), osteoarthritis of the contralateral hip. Of the 64 patients in the study, 39 had a radiographic pre-op acetabular size planning equal or less than 50 mm and 25 patients had a radiographic pre-op acetabular size planning equal or more than 52 mm. We considered a good result the following goals: acetabular bend between 35 and 50 degrees, acetabular size according to the pre-op estimative with full contact in the three zones of DeLee-Charnley, a lower medial and vertical positioning of the rotation center in comparison with the pre-op values and a final limb discrepancy lower than 10 mm. Results: A better restoration of the rotation center, as well as, excellent acetabular positioning was found in patients with smaller acetabular size (equal or less than 50), p=0, 04. We must draw attention to two risks when using the minimally-invasive posterior approach: a vertical acetabular position and a lateral position of the acetabular component increasing the risk of a poor contact in the zone 1 due to an insufficient reaming of the medial acetabular host bone. Conclusion: We propose standard surgical approaches in patients with larger anatomical measurements (acetabular planning size more than 50).