We have located links that may give you full text access.
Leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty: comparison of 3 intraoperative measurement methods.
Hip International : the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Research on Hip Pathology and Therapy 2018 May
INTRODUCTION: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is 1 of the most successful and frequent orthopaedic procedures around the world. Leg length discrepancy is reported in 1% to 60% of cases and is 1 of the most frequent causes of patient dissatisfaction and a common reason for litigation. The aim of this study was to compare leg length discrepancies following THA using 3 different intraoperative measuring methods.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present a prospective cohort study of 454 hips undergoing THA for osteoarthritis between January 2009 and August 2016. We compared postoperative leg length discrepancy using 1 of the following 3 measurement methods: (1A) direct intraoperative comparison of the legs; (1B) measurement with a compass-like device with supra-acetabular fixation, involving length and offset; (1C, D) an intraoperative device that measures the trochanteric/joint ratio.
RESULTS: Leg length discrepancy >5 mm was present in 26% of the total study population. Direct intraoperative leg-to-leg assessment resulted in the greatest proportion of leg length discrepancy >5 mm (31%), followed by the compass group (27%) and the least discrepancy was observed in the trochanteric/joint ratio group (15%). The trochanteric/joint ratio assessment method resulted in the greatest reduction in discrepancy when compared to the other methods: discrepancies of 5-10 mm fell by 48% (relative risk [RR] 0.40 CI [confidence interval [CI] 95%, 0.22-0.74), and discrepancies of ≥10 mm fell by 59% (RR 0.52; CI 95%, 0.32-0.84).
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the use of an intraoperative measurement device can reduce the leg length discrepancy, with best results when using the trochanteric/joint ratio device.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present a prospective cohort study of 454 hips undergoing THA for osteoarthritis between January 2009 and August 2016. We compared postoperative leg length discrepancy using 1 of the following 3 measurement methods: (1A) direct intraoperative comparison of the legs; (1B) measurement with a compass-like device with supra-acetabular fixation, involving length and offset; (1C, D) an intraoperative device that measures the trochanteric/joint ratio.
RESULTS: Leg length discrepancy >5 mm was present in 26% of the total study population. Direct intraoperative leg-to-leg assessment resulted in the greatest proportion of leg length discrepancy >5 mm (31%), followed by the compass group (27%) and the least discrepancy was observed in the trochanteric/joint ratio group (15%). The trochanteric/joint ratio assessment method resulted in the greatest reduction in discrepancy when compared to the other methods: discrepancies of 5-10 mm fell by 48% (relative risk [RR] 0.40 CI [confidence interval [CI] 95%, 0.22-0.74), and discrepancies of ≥10 mm fell by 59% (RR 0.52; CI 95%, 0.32-0.84).
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the use of an intraoperative measurement device can reduce the leg length discrepancy, with best results when using the trochanteric/joint ratio device.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Review article: Recent advances in ascites and acute kidney injury management in cirrhosis.Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2024 March 26
Executive Summary: State-of-the-Art Review: Unintended Consequences: Risk of Opportunistic Infections Associated with Long-term Glucocorticoid Therapies in Adults.Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 April 11
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app