6 research outputs found

    Good vs Poor Results After Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Analysis Method Using Implant and Anatomic Parameters With the EOS Imaging System

    Get PDF
    Background: Existing imaging techniques and single-parameter analyses, in nonfunctional positions, fail to detect the differences between patients with good vs poor results after total hip arthroplasty. Methods: The present study developed an analysis method using the EOS full-body, low-dose, biplanar, weightbearing imaging system to compare good vs poor patients after total hip arthroplasty and to report on our preliminary experiences (17 good, 18 poor). Results: All revision cases were found to have at least 4 high or low implant or anatomic parameters relative to the good group. These included acetabular cup orientation, sagittal pelvic tilt, sacral slope, femoral offset, and neckeshaft angle. Acetabular cup orientation differed significantly between groups. Conclusion: With the EOS system, a large cohort can be studied relatively quickly and at low dose, which could lead to patient-specific guidelines

    The global alignment in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: our experience using the EOS full-body images

    Get PDF
    Lumbar stenosis is frequently observed and treated by spine surgeons. The extent of neurological decompression and the potential spinal fixation are the basic concerns when surgery is planned. But this segmented approach to the problem is sometimes insufficient due to the complex functional situations induced by a sagittal imbalance of the patient and the combination of pathologies known as hip-spine or knee-spine syndromes. A total of 373 consecutive patients included from our EOS and clinical data base. Patients were divided in two groups. Group A included patients presenting exclusive spinal issues (172 cases) out of whom 117 (68 %) had sagittal imbalance. Among 201 patients with associated lower limbs issues (group B), 122 (61 %) had sagittal imbalance. The perception of imbalance was noticed in 54 % (93 cases) in group A and 57 % (115 cases) in group B. In the global series of 239 imbalanced cases, the key point was a spine issue for 165 patients (the 117 patients with only spine problems and 48/122 cases with combined spine and lower limbs problems). But in the patients with combined spine and lower limbs problems, we individualized hipspine syndromes (24/122 patients) and knee-spine syndromes (13/122 patients). In some cases, (37/122 patients) the anatomical and functional situations were more complex to characterize a spine-hip or a hip-spine problem. The EOS full-body images provide new information regarding the global spinal and lower limbs alignment to improve the understanding of the patient functional posture. This study highlights the importance of the lower limb evaluation not only as compensatory mechanism of the spinal problems but also as an individualized parameter with its own influence on the global balance analysis. Level of evidence IV diagnostic case series

    Healthy vs. osteoarthritic hips: A comparison of hip, pelvis and femoral parameters and relationships using the EOS® system

    Get PDF
    Osteoarthritis is a debilitating disease, for which the development path is unknown. Hip, pelvis and femoral morphological and positional parameters relate either to individual differences or to changes in the disease state, both of which should be taken into account when diagnosing and treating patients. These have not yet been comprehensively quantified. Previous imaging studies have been limited by a number of factors: supine rather than standing measurements; high radiation dose; a limited field of view; and 2D rather than 3D measurements. EOS®, a new radiographic imaging modality that acquires simultaneous frontal and lateral (sagittal) X-ray images of the full body, allows 3D reconstruction of the hip, pelvis and lower limb. The aim of the study was to explore similarities and differences between healthy and osteoarthritis groups

    Éditorial

    No full text
    corecore