Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Spinopelvic Compensatory Mechanisms for Reduced Hip Motion (ROM) in the Setting of Hip Osteoarthritis

  • Aaron J. Buckland
  • , Leah Steinmetz
  • , Peter Zhou
  • , Dennis Vasquez-Montes
  • , Matthew Kingery
  • , Nicholas D. Stekas
  • , Ethan W. Ayres
  • , Christopher G. Varlotta
  • , Virginie Lafage
  • , Renaud Lafage
  • , Thomas Errico
  • , Peter G. Passias
  • , Themistocles S. Protopsaltis
  • , Jonathan Vigdorchik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Study Design: Retrospective review from a single institution. Objective: To investigate the effect of hip osteoarthritis (OA) on spinopelvic compensatory mechanisms as a result of reduced hip range of motion (ROM) between sitting and standing. Summary of Background Data: Hip OA results in reduced hip ROM and contracture, causing pain during postural changes. Hip flexion contracture is known to reduce the ability to compensate for spinal deformity while standing; however, the effects of postural spinal alignment change between sitting and standing is not well understood. Methods: Sit-stand radiographs of patients without prior spinal fusion or hip prosthesis were evaluated. Hip OA was graded by Kellgren-Lawrence grades and divided into low-grade (LOA; grade 0–2) and severe (SOA; grade 3 or 4) groups. Radiographic parameters evaluated were pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), PI-LL, thoracic kyphosis (TK), SVA, T1-pelvic angle (TPA), T10–L2, proximal femoral shaft angle (PFSA), and hip flexion (PT change–PFSA change). Changes in sit-stand parameters were compared between LOA and SOA groups. Results: 548 patients were included (LOA = 311; SOA = 237). After propensity score matching for age, body mass index, and PI, 183 LOA and 183 SOA patients were analyzed. Standing analysis demonstrated that SOA had higher SVA (31.1 vs. 21.7), lower TK (−36.2 vs. −41.1), and larger PFSA (9.1 vs. 7.4) (all p < .05). Sitting analysis demonstrated that SOA had higher PT (29.7 vs. 23.3), higher PI-LL (21.6 vs. 12.4), less LL (31.7 vs. 41.6), less TK (−33.2 vs. −38.6), and greater TPA (27.9 vs. 22.5) (all p < .05). SOA had less hip ROM from standing to sitting versus LOA (71.5 vs. 81.6) (p < .05). Therefore, SOA had more change in PT (15.2 vs. 7.3), PI-LL (20.6 vs. 13.7), LL (−21.4 vs. −13.1), and T10–L2 (−4.9 vs. −1.1) (all p < .001), allowing the femurs to change position despite reduced hip ROM. SOA had greater TPA reduction (15.1 vs. 9.6) and less PFSA change (86.7 vs. 88.8) compared with LOA (both p < .001). Conclusions: Spinopelvic compensatory mechanisms are adapted for reduced hip joint motion associated with hip OA in standing and sitting. Level of Evidence: Level III.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)923-928
Number of pages6
JournalSpine Deformity
Volume7
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2019
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Hip
  • Osteoarthritis
  • Sagittal spinal balance
  • Spine
  • Spinopelvic alignment

Cite this