Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2021; 56(04): 513-516
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1721360
Artigo Original
Quadril

Medição da versão acetabular após artroplastia total do quadril: Comparação de dois métodos radiográficos[*]

Article in several languages: português | English
Afonso Cardoso 
1   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Loures, Portugal
,
Mafalda Duarte
2   Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
,
Rui Viegas 
1   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Loures, Portugal
,
Filipe Oliveira
1   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Loures, Portugal
,
Pedro Pinto
1   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Loures, Portugal
,
Paulo Rego 
1   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Loures, Portugal
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Resumo

Objetivo O objetivo do presente trabalho foi comparar a medição da versão do componente acetabular em radiografias em incidência anteroposterior (AP) e cross-table após artroplastia total do quadril (ATQ).

Métodos Foram selecionadas radiografias de 60 quadris com ATQ primário. A versão foi calculada na radiografia AP usando o método de Lewinnek e, na cross-table, usando o método direto do Woo e Morrey.

Resultados A média e o desvio padrão (DP) foram diferentes em ambas as radiografias, sendo 9,7° ± 5,5° no AP, enquanto na cross-table foram 20,6° ± 8,4° (p < 0,001). Considerando nosso objetivo de 10°, as medidas da cross-table foram estatisticamente diferentes dele (p < 0,001), enquanto a medição AP não diferiu (p = 0,716).

Conclusão O presente estudo mostrou que a melhor maneira de avaliar corretamente o posicionamento do componente acetabular após uma ATQ é medindo a anteversão e a abdução em uma radiografia AP após confirmar, em uma radiografia cross-table, que o componente não é retrovertido.

Palavras-chave

artroplastia de quadril - acetábulo - radiografia

Suporte Financeiro

Não houve suporte financeiro de fontes públicas, comerciais, ou sem fins lucrativos.


* Trabalho desenvolvido no Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Loures, Portugal.




Publication History

Received: 10 March 2020

Accepted: 16 September 2020

Article published online:
22 March 2021

© 2021. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Charnley J. Total hip replacement by low-friction arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1970; 72 (72) 7-21
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Del Schutte Jr H, Lipman AJ, Bannar SM, Livermore JT, Ilstrup D, Morrey BF. Effects of acetabular abduction on cup wear rates in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13 (06) 621-626
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Widmer KH, Zurfluh B. Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion. J Orthop Res 2004; 22 (04) 815-821
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Woo RY, Morrey BF. Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1982; 64 (09) 1295-1306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Murray DW. The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993; 75 (02) 228-232
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Biedermann R, Tonin A, Krismer M, Rachbauer F, Eibl G, Stöckl B. Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: the effect of orientation of the acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87 (06) 762-769
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmerman JR. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1978; 60 (02) 217-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Ackland MK, Bourne WB, Uhthoff HK. Anteversion of the acetabular cup. Measurement of angle after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1986; 68 (03) 409-413
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Müller O, Reize P, Trappmann D, Wülker N. Measuring anatomical acetabular cup orientation with a new X-ray technique. Comput Aided Surg 2006; 11 (02) 69-75
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Nho JH, Lee YK, Kim HJ, Ha YC, Suh YS, Koo KH. Reliability and validity of measuring version of the acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94 (01) 32-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Visser JD, Konings JG. A new method for measuring angles after total hip arthroplasty. A study of the acetabular cup and femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1981; 63B (04) 556-559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Widmer KH. A simplified method to determine acetabular cup anteversion from plain radiographs. J Arthroplasty 2004; 19 (03) 387-390
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Arai N, Nakamura S, Matsushita T. Difference between 2 measurement methods of version angles of the acetabular component. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (05) 715-720
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Coventry MB. Late dislocations in patients with Charnley total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985; 67 (06) 832-841
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 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 (04) 513-517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Abdel MP, von Roth P, Jennings MT, Hanssen AD, Pagnano MW. What Safe Zone? The Vast Majority of Dislocated THAs Are Within the Lewinnek Safe Zone for Acetabular Component Position. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474 (02) 386-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Esposito CI, Gladnick BP, Lee YY. et al. Cup position alone does not predict risk of dislocation after hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (01) 109-113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jolles BM, Zangger P, Leyvraz PF. Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multivariate analysis. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17 (03) 282-288
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ha YC, Yoo JJ, Lee YK, Kim JY, Koo KH. Acetabular component positioning using anatomic landmarks of the acetabulum. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (12) 3515-3523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bhaskar D, Rajpura A, Board T. Current Concepts in Acetabular Positioning in Total Hip Arthroplasty. Indian J Orthop 2017; 51 (04) 386-396
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 McArthur B, Cross M, Geatrakas C, Mayman D, Ghelman B. Measuring acetabular component version after THA: CT or plain radiograph?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (10) 2810-2818
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar