What Is the Functional Spinopelvic Relationship in Three Dimensions? A CT and EOS Study.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Angelika Ramesh, Johann Henckel, Xing Lim, Patrick Tompsett, Alister Hart, Anna Di Laura
{"title":"What Is the Functional Spinopelvic Relationship in Three Dimensions? A CT and EOS Study.","authors":"Angelika Ramesh, Johann Henckel, Xing Lim, Patrick Tompsett, Alister Hart, Anna Di Laura","doi":"10.1097/CORR.0000000000003473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding the spinopelvic relationship is essential in THA planning, especially given the elevated hip dislocation risk in patients exhibiting abnormal spinopelvic movements. Rotations of the spinopelvic unit affect the functional orientation of the acetabulum and, in turn, the placement of the acetabular cup. Currently, however, the kinematic behavior of the pelvis is not considered preoperatively. Standard CT scans and radiographs only guide component positioning based on the supine position, which may result in suboptimal acetabular cup alignment in more functionally relevant positions. Therefore, the ideal imaging for 3-dimensional (3D) planning of hip surgery is full-length standing CT, which is yet to be implemented given the technical and logistical challenges and high radiation doses involved.</p><p><strong>Questions/purposes: </strong>(1) What is the pelvic tilt in the functional positions of supine, standing, and seated? (2) How does the pelvic orientation change when transitioning between these positions?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between 2020 and 2023, we treated 36 patients for osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent preoperative CT and EOS imaging for their primary THA at our tertiary center. We considered all of those with a satisfactory CT and EOS scan as potentially eligible for this study. Based on that, 86% (31) were confirmed as eligible for analysis here; 14% (5) were excluded because of an incomplete scan field of view, presence of a spinal implant, or because of difficulty in identifying the anterior pelvic plane (APP). The final analysis included 31 patients with OA (23 women and 8 men, mean ± SD age 63 ± 13 years). We proposed a comparison method that uses 3D models of the supine CT-generated bony anatomy and standing and seated full-body biplanar radiography (EOS scans) to obtain the absolute and relative values of pelvic orientation in this patient cohort. To answer our first research question, we performed computational measurements of the patients' pelvic tilt in all three planes (sagittal, coronal, and axial) and in three functional positions: supine, standing, and seated. To answer our second question, we compared and studied each patient's pelvic rotation as they transitioned between these positions. The outcome measures were the angular measurements of (1) pelvic tilt from CT (supine) and EOS (standing and seated) and (2) the change in pelvic tilt when transitioning from supine-standing, supine-seated, and standing-seated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean ± SD sagittal pelvic tilt was greatest in the seated position, least in the standing position, and intermediate in the supine position (-26° ± 12° versus -2° ± 9° versus 6° ± 7°, respectively; p < 0.001). A positive pelvic tilt value denoted an anterior tilt of the APP with respect to the coronal plane and a negative value denoted a posterior tilt. The mean difference in the sagittal pelvic tilt between the supine and standing position was 8° ± 6° (95% confidence interval [CI] 6° to 10°; p < 0.001). The mean difference in the sagittal pelvic tilt between the supine and seated position was 32° ± 13° (95% CI 27° to 38°; p < 0.001). The mean difference in the sagittal pelvic tilt between the standing and seated position was 26° ± 15° (95% CI 20° to 31°; p < 0.001). When comparing the supine to standing transition to the standing to seated transition, the mean difference in the sagittal pelvic rotation was -19° ± 18° (95% CI -26° to -12°; p < 0.001). When comparing the supine to standing transition to the supine to seated transition, the mean difference in the sagittal pelvic rotation was -26° ± 15° (95% CI -31° to -20°; p < 0.001). When comparing the supine to seated transition to the standing to seated transition, the mean difference in the sagittal pelvic rotation was 7° ± 5° (95% CI 5° to 9°; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings from this study show that patients with hip arthritis exhibit pelvic rotations between their daily movements and postures; this rotation may be excessive for some individuals given the large sagittal pelvic tilts reported. This puts some patients at risk of dislocation, edge loading, and limited range of motion (ROM) given that cup orientation in THA is widely known to be affected by the sagittal pelvic tilt. Our work therefore emphasizes the importance of measuring patient-specific pelvic positions and rotations before hip replacement procedures and offers a method to do so.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>The functional orientation of the pelvis and the anatomic-functional relationship between the pelvis and spine are seldom considered by surgeons when positioning prosthetic acetabular components. Performing EOS scans in addition to pelvic CT scans can help the surgeon better understand the spinopelvic relationship and the 3D pelvic orientation in the functional supine, standing, and seated positions. This can aid the planning of THA as patients with extreme pelvic parameters and an increased risk of instability can be identified prior to the surgery, and the orientation of the acetabular cup may be adjusted accordingly.</p>","PeriodicalId":10404,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000003473","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Understanding the spinopelvic relationship is essential in THA planning, especially given the elevated hip dislocation risk in patients exhibiting abnormal spinopelvic movements. Rotations of the spinopelvic unit affect the functional orientation of the acetabulum and, in turn, the placement of the acetabular cup. Currently, however, the kinematic behavior of the pelvis is not considered preoperatively. Standard CT scans and radiographs only guide component positioning based on the supine position, which may result in suboptimal acetabular cup alignment in more functionally relevant positions. Therefore, the ideal imaging for 3-dimensional (3D) planning of hip surgery is full-length standing CT, which is yet to be implemented given the technical and logistical challenges and high radiation doses involved.

Questions/purposes: (1) What is the pelvic tilt in the functional positions of supine, standing, and seated? (2) How does the pelvic orientation change when transitioning between these positions?

Methods: Between 2020 and 2023, we treated 36 patients for osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent preoperative CT and EOS imaging for their primary THA at our tertiary center. We considered all of those with a satisfactory CT and EOS scan as potentially eligible for this study. Based on that, 86% (31) were confirmed as eligible for analysis here; 14% (5) were excluded because of an incomplete scan field of view, presence of a spinal implant, or because of difficulty in identifying the anterior pelvic plane (APP). The final analysis included 31 patients with OA (23 women and 8 men, mean ± SD age 63 ± 13 years). We proposed a comparison method that uses 3D models of the supine CT-generated bony anatomy and standing and seated full-body biplanar radiography (EOS scans) to obtain the absolute and relative values of pelvic orientation in this patient cohort. To answer our first research question, we performed computational measurements of the patients' pelvic tilt in all three planes (sagittal, coronal, and axial) and in three functional positions: supine, standing, and seated. To answer our second question, we compared and studied each patient's pelvic rotation as they transitioned between these positions. The outcome measures were the angular measurements of (1) pelvic tilt from CT (supine) and EOS (standing and seated) and (2) the change in pelvic tilt when transitioning from supine-standing, supine-seated, and standing-seated.

Results: The mean ± SD sagittal pelvic tilt was greatest in the seated position, least in the standing position, and intermediate in the supine position (-26° ± 12° versus -2° ± 9° versus 6° ± 7°, respectively; p < 0.001). A positive pelvic tilt value denoted an anterior tilt of the APP with respect to the coronal plane and a negative value denoted a posterior tilt. The mean difference in the sagittal pelvic tilt between the supine and standing position was 8° ± 6° (95% confidence interval [CI] 6° to 10°; p < 0.001). The mean difference in the sagittal pelvic tilt between the supine and seated position was 32° ± 13° (95% CI 27° to 38°; p < 0.001). The mean difference in the sagittal pelvic tilt between the standing and seated position was 26° ± 15° (95% CI 20° to 31°; p < 0.001). When comparing the supine to standing transition to the standing to seated transition, the mean difference in the sagittal pelvic rotation was -19° ± 18° (95% CI -26° to -12°; p < 0.001). When comparing the supine to standing transition to the supine to seated transition, the mean difference in the sagittal pelvic rotation was -26° ± 15° (95% CI -31° to -20°; p < 0.001). When comparing the supine to seated transition to the standing to seated transition, the mean difference in the sagittal pelvic rotation was 7° ± 5° (95% CI 5° to 9°; p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The findings from this study show that patients with hip arthritis exhibit pelvic rotations between their daily movements and postures; this rotation may be excessive for some individuals given the large sagittal pelvic tilts reported. This puts some patients at risk of dislocation, edge loading, and limited range of motion (ROM) given that cup orientation in THA is widely known to be affected by the sagittal pelvic tilt. Our work therefore emphasizes the importance of measuring patient-specific pelvic positions and rotations before hip replacement procedures and offers a method to do so.

Clinical relevance: The functional orientation of the pelvis and the anatomic-functional relationship between the pelvis and spine are seldom considered by surgeons when positioning prosthetic acetabular components. Performing EOS scans in addition to pelvic CT scans can help the surgeon better understand the spinopelvic relationship and the 3D pelvic orientation in the functional supine, standing, and seated positions. This can aid the planning of THA as patients with extreme pelvic parameters and an increased risk of instability can be identified prior to the surgery, and the orientation of the acetabular cup may be adjusted accordingly.

什么是脊柱-骨盆的三维功能关系?CT和EOS研究。
背景:了解脊柱-骨盆关系在THA计划中是必不可少的,特别是考虑到脊柱-骨盆运动异常的患者髋关节脱位风险升高。椎盂单元的旋转影响髋臼的功能方向,进而影响髋臼杯的位置。然而,目前,术前未考虑骨盆的运动学行为。标准的CT扫描和x线片仅根据仰卧位引导部件定位,这可能导致在功能更相关的位置上髋臼杯对准不理想。因此,髋关节手术三维规划的理想成像是全长站立式CT,但由于技术和后勤方面的挑战以及所涉及的高辐射剂量,这种成像尚未实现。问题/目的:(1)仰卧位、站立位和坐位的骨盆倾斜是多少?(2)在这些体位之间转换时骨盆的朝向是如何变化的?方法:在2020年至2023年期间,我们治疗了36例骨关节炎(OA)患者,这些患者在我们的三级中心接受了原发性THA术前CT和EOS成像。我们认为所有CT和EOS扫描结果满意的患者都有可能符合本研究的要求。在此基础上,86%(31例)被确认为符合分析条件;14%(5)因扫描视野不完整、存在脊柱植入物或难以识别骨盆前平面(APP)而被排除。最终纳入31例OA患者(女性23例,男性8例,平均±SD年龄63±13岁)。我们提出了一种比较方法,使用仰卧位ct生成的骨骼解剖三维模型与站立和坐姿的全身双平面x线摄影(EOS扫描)来获得该患者队列中骨盆取向的绝对和相对值。为了回答我们的第一个研究问题,我们对患者的骨盆倾斜在所有三个平面(矢状面、冠状面和轴状面)和三个功能位置(仰卧、站立和坐姿)进行了计算测量。为了回答我们的第二个问题,我们比较并研究了每位患者在这些体位之间转换时的骨盆旋转情况。结果测量为(1)CT(仰卧位)和EOS(站立和坐姿)骨盆倾斜的角度测量,以及(2)从仰卧-站立、仰卧-坐姿和站立-坐姿过渡时骨盆倾斜的变化。结果:坐位时骨盆矢状面平均±SD倾斜度最大,站立位最小,仰卧位居中(分别为-26°±12°和-2°±9°和6°±7°);P < 0.001)。骨盆倾斜值为正表示APP相对于冠状面前倾斜,负值表示后倾斜。仰卧位和站立位矢状骨盆倾斜的平均差异为8°±6°(95%可信区间[CI] 6°至10°;P < 0.001)。仰卧位和坐姿之间矢状骨盆倾斜的平均差异为32°±13°(95% CI 27°至38°;P < 0.001)。站立和坐姿之间矢状骨盆倾斜的平均差异为26°±15°(95% CI 20°至31°;P < 0.001)。当比较仰卧到站立过渡和站立到坐姿过渡时,矢状面骨盆旋转的平均差异为-19°±18°(95% CI为-26°至-12°;P < 0.001)。当比较仰卧向站立过渡和仰卧向坐姿过渡时,矢状面骨盆旋转的平均差异为-26°±15°(95% CI为-31°至-20°;P < 0.001)。当比较仰卧转坐位过渡和站立转坐位过渡时,矢状面骨盆旋转的平均差异为7°±5°(95% CI 5°至9°;P < 0.001)。结论:本研究结果表明,髋关节关节炎患者在日常运动和姿势之间表现出骨盆旋转;考虑到报道的大矢状骨盆倾斜,这种旋转可能对某些个体过度。这使得一些患者面临脱位、边缘负荷和活动范围受限的风险,因为众所周知,髋关节置换术中的杯状位受骨盆矢状倾斜的影响。因此,我们的工作强调了在髋关节置换术前测量患者特定骨盆位置和旋转的重要性,并提供了一种方法。临床相关性:在定位髋臼假体时,外科医生很少考虑骨盆的功能方向以及骨盆和脊柱之间的解剖-功能关系。在骨盆CT扫描的基础上进行EOS扫描,可以帮助外科医生更好地了解脊柱与骨盆的关系,以及仰卧位、站立位和坐位时骨盆的三维方向。 这有助于THA的规划,因为可以在手术前识别骨盆参数极端和不稳定风险增加的患者,并且可以相应地调整髋臼杯的方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
11.90%
发文量
722
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® is a leading peer-reviewed journal devoted to the dissemination of new and important orthopaedic knowledge. CORR® brings readers the latest clinical and basic research, along with columns, commentaries, and interviews with authors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信