There is little evidence for improved kinematics or better long-term outcomes following the use of the direct anterior approach for THA. There is a steep learning curve with similar rates of complications, length of stay and outcomes. Well-designed, multi-centre, prospective randomised controlled trials are required to provide evidence as to whether the direct anterior approach is better than the lateral or posterior approaches when undertaking THA. Cite this article: 2017;99-B:732-40.

There have been considerable recent advances in the understanding and management of femoroacetabular impingement and associated labral and chondral pathology. We have developed a classification system for acetabular chondral lesions. In our system, we use the six acetabular zones previously described by Ilizaliturri et al. The cartilage is then graded on a scale of 0 to 4 as follows: grade 0, normal articular cartilage lesions; grade 1, softening or wave sign; grade 2, cleavage lesion; grade 3, delamination; and grade 4, exposed bone. The site of the lesion is further classed as A, B or C based on whether the lesion is less than one-third of the distance from the acetabular rim to the cotyloid fossa, one-third to two-thirds of the same distance and greater than two-thirds of the distance, respectively. In order to validate the classification system, six surgeons graded ten video recordings of hip arthroscopy. Our findings showed a high intra-observer reliability of the classification system with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81 and a high interobserver reliability with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.88. We have developed a simple reproducible classification system for lesions of the acetabular cartilage, which it is hoped will allow standardised documentation to be made of damage to the articular cartilage, particularly that associated with femoroacetabular impingement.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Pelvic radiographs are helpful in assessing limb-length discrepancy (LLD) before and after THA but are subject to variation. Different methods are used to determine LLDs. As a pelvic reference, both ischial tuberosities and the teardrops are used, and as a femoral reference, the lesser trochanter and center of the femoral head are used. Questions/purposes We validated the different methods for preoperative radiographic measurement of LLDs and evaluated their reliability. Patients and Methods LLDs were measured on full-leg radiographs for 52 patients (29 men, 23 women) with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and compared with different methods for measuring LLDs on AP radiographs of the pelvis. Results The true LLD varied from À8.0 to 9.1 mm. When the biischial line was used as a pelvic reference, the LLD measured on AP pelvis radiographs was different from the true LLD. No difference was found when the interteardrop line was used as a pelvic reference. There was substantial interobserver agreement when the lesser trochanter was used as a femoral reference (kappa = 0.66-0.70) and excellent interobserver and intraobserver agreement for all other measurements (kappa = 0.84-0.93). Conclusions Our data show use of the biischial line as a pelvic reference should be discouraged and the interteardrop line is a better alternative. The center of the femoral head is a more reliable femoral landmark compared with the lesser trochanter. Level of Evidence Level I, diagnostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.