Background Lumbar-pelvic stiffness and sagittal imbalance have been reported to increase the risk of dislocation and wear after THA. One potential way to approach this concern is by identifying patient-specific safe zones for THA components based on the standing and sitting sagittal pelvic tilt. However, there is no algorithm to integrate the standing and sitting pelvic tilt into the surgical plan of component orientations. Questions/purposesWe established a new mathematical algorithm for determining a patient-specific safe zone for THA by integrating the impingement-free ROM requirements of standing and sitting while preventing edge loading while standing. We aimed to determine (1) the accuracy of this new method for predicting the impingement-free ROM for a given component orientation, (2) the sensitivity and specificity of detecting an impingement-free acetabular cup position for standing and sitting, and (3) the influences of key factors including pelvic tilt while standing and pelvic tilt while sitting and implant parameters on patientspecific safe zones. Methods A strategy for calculating the intersection of standing and sitting impingement-free safe zones and the zone of a standing radiographic inclination of # 45°was used to develop patient-specific safe zones. We conducted a computer simulation study including the pelvis and THA prosthesis to answer the three study questions. We enrolled 10 patients who underwent robot-assisted THA for avascular necrosis of the femoral head (mean age 49 6 19 years; five were women) from October 2019 to December 2019. We used a prosthesis model with a conical stem neck and a non-hooded liner, with the femoral head diameter ranging between 28 mm and 40 mm, and the corresponding head-neck ratio ranging between 2.33 and 3.33. We tested 1680 movements for the accuracy of impingement-free ROM (Question 1), and 80 marginal points and 120 non-marginal points of the comprehensive impingement-free safe zone, which combines the standing and sitting postures (Question 2). For Question 3, we explored the influences of standing and sitting pelvic tilt, femoral head diameter, and ROM criteria on the size of the patient-specific safe zone.The institution of one or more of the authors (HT) has received, during the study period, funding from the National Science Foundation of China (grant number 82002372 and grant number 52035012) and the Beijing Jishuitan Hospital Incubation Program (grant number ZR-201920). Each author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request. This study was approved by the ethics committee of Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing, China (number 20200...

Background: Ante-inclination (AI) of the cup is a key component of the combined sagittal index (CSI) for predicting joint stability after total hip arthroplasty (THA). We aimed to (1) validate a mathematical algorithm relating AI to radiographic anteversion (RA), radiographic inclination (RI), and pelvic tilt (PT); (2) convert the AI criterion of the CSI into the coronal functional safe zone (CFSZ) and explore the influences of standing-to-sitting pelvic motion (PM) and pelvic incidence (PI) on the CFSZ; and (3) attempt to locate a universal cup orientation that always fulfills the AI criterion of the CSI for all patients.Methods: In the first phase, a phantom pelvis was designed to simulate a range of PT values, and an acetabular cup was implanted with different RA, RI, and PT settings using a robot-assisted technique and scanned using the EOS imaging system. The second phase involved patient radiographs. We enrolled 100 patients who underwent robot-assisted THA from April 2019 to December 2019, and EOS images before THA and at the 12-month follow-up were recorded. The AI was measured on a lateral radiograph; this angle was used as the reference and compared with the calculated AI to assess the accuracy of the algorithm. Linear regression was conducted to explore the relationship between the size of the CFSZ and the values of PM and PI. We calculated the intersection of the CFSZs of the patients to find a universal cup orientation (RA and RI) for the CSI. Results:The algorithm was accurate according to both the phantom study and patient radiographs using PT at the time of follow-up, with mean absolute errors (MAEs) of 1.5°(width of 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2°) and 2.8°(width of 95% CI, 3.0°), respectively. However, the preoperatively predicted AI had an MAE of 9.0°(width of 95% CI, 10.5°). In patient subgroups with lower PM or PI, the sizes of the CFSZ and of its intersection with the Lewinnek safe zone were significantly smaller (p < 0.017). No universal cup orientation existed to fulfill the CSI criteria for all patients or for any of the PM or PI subgroups. Conclusions:The target orientation for the cup in THA should be individualized. Our validated algorithm may serve as a quantitative tool for the patient-specific optimization of cup AI on the basis of the functional safe zone.Clinical Relevance: The Lewinnek safe zone fails because it cannot predict the functional orientation of the cup. The concept of a universal safe zone of cup orientation should be abandoned and replaced by a patient-specific surgical target.Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/G921).

Background Three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) reconstruction is the reference standard for measuring component orientation. However, functional cup orientation in standing position is preferable compared with supine position. The low-dose bi-planar radiographs can be used to analyze standing cup component orientation. We aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the component orientation using the low-dose bi-planar radiographs compared with the 3D CT reconstruction, and explore the differences between the functional cup orientation in standing radiographs and supine CT scans. Methods A retrospective study, including 44 patients (50 hips) with total hip arthroplasty (THA), was conducted. CT scans were taken 1 week after surgery and the low-dose bi-planar radiographs were taken in the follow-up 6 weeks later. Component orientation measurement was performed using the anterior pelvic plane and the radiographic coronal plane as reference, respectively. Results The study showed no significant difference in cup anteversion (p = 0.160), cup inclination (p = 0.486), and stem anteversion (p = 0.219) measured by the low-dose bi-planar radiographs and 3D reconstruction. The differences calculated by the Bland–Altman analysis ranged from − 0.4° to 0.6° for the three measured angles. However, the mean absolute error was 4.76 ± 1.07° for functional anteversion (p = 0.035) and 4.02 ± 1.08° for functional inclination (p = 0.030) measured by the bi-planar radiographs and supine CT scans. Conclusions The low-dose bi-planar radiographs are the same reliable and accurate as 3D CT reconstruction to assess post-THA patients’ component orientation, while providing more valuable functional component orientation than supine CT scans.