Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UNIPROT:P50502 (Hip)
 7,003 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Restoration of hip biomechanics is a crucial component of successful total hip replacement. Preoperative templating is recommended to ensure that the size and orientation of implants is optimised. We studied how closely natural femoral offset could be reproduced using the manufacturers' templates for 10 femoral stems in common use in the UK. A series of 23 consecutive preoperative radiographs from patients who had undergone unilateral total hip replacement for unilateral osteoarthritis of the hip was employed. The change in offset between the templated position of the best-fitting template and the anatomical centre of the hip was measured. The templates were then ranked according to their ability to reproduce the normal anatomical offset. The most accurate was the CPS-Plus (Root Mean Square Error 2.0 mm) followed in rank order by: C stem (2.16), CPT (2.40), Exeter (3.23), Stanmore (3.28), Charnley (3.65), Corail (3.72), ABG II (4.30), Furlong HAC (5.08) and Furlong modular (7.14). A similar pattern of results was achieved when the standard error of variability of offset was analysed. We observed a wide variation in the ability of the femoral prosthesis templates to reproduce normal femoral offset. This variation was independent of the seniority of the observer. The templates of modern polished tapered stems with high modularity were best able to reproduce femoral offset. The current move towards digitisation of X-rays may offer manufacturers an opportunity to improve template designs in certain instances, and to develop appropriate computer software.
Hip Int
PMID:Accuracy of femoral templating in reproducing anatomical femoral offset in total hip replacement. 1919 61

We measured and compared critical parameters on antero-posterior radiographs from 28 patients who had undergone hybrid hip replacement (CPS/EPF), with 28 patients who had undergone cemented hip resurfacing (Cormet). All operations were performed by a single surgeon or under his supervision. We measured the femoral offset, acetabular offset, cup height and leg length on pre and post operative radiographs. The mean difference in femoral offset post-operatively was 3.52 mm (95% CI: -1.10 to 8.14 mm) in the hybrid group and -1.30 mm (95%CI: -2.88 to 0.29 mm) in the resurfacing group. Using the independent sample t test (two-tailed), the difference between these means was significant, test statistic t 2.025, p<0.05. This suggests that resurfacing restored the femoral offset more accurately than hybrid hip replacement. The mean difference in leg length post-operatively was 11.91 mm (95% CI: 8.21 to 15.62 mm) in the hybrid group and 4.87 mm (95% CI: 3.32 to 6.42 mm) in the resurfacing group. Using the independent sample t test (two-tailed), the difference between the means was significant, test statistic t 3.597, p<0.001. This suggests that resurfacing produced less change in leg length post-operatively than hybrid hip replacement. We found no statistically significant difference in ideal pre and post operative centre of rotation in the two groups. Proximal femoral anatomy was restored during hip resurfacing by resecting bone of a thickness determined by corresponding preoperative templating and implant thickness rather than relying on placement of the cutting ring at the head-neck junction. No femoral neck fractures occurred in the resurfacing group.
Hip Int
PMID:Leg length and offset following hip resurfacing and hip replacement. 1946 71