Postoperative radiograph of the hip arthroplasty: what the radiologist should know

被引：59

作者：

Vanrusselt J. ^{[1
]}

Vansevenant M. ^{[3
,4
]}

Vanderschueren G. ^{[1
]}

Vanhoenacker F. ^{[2
,3
,4
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Radiology, University Hospital Leuven, Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, Leuven

[2] Department of Radiology, University Hospital Antwerp, Wilrijkstraat 10, Edegem

[3] Department of Radiology, University of Ghent, De Pintelaan 185, Ghent

[4] Department of Radiology, AZ St-Maarten Duffel/Mechelen, Rooienberg 25, Duffel

来源：

Insights into Imaging | 2015年 / 6卷 / 6期

关键词：

Arthroplasty; Hip; Imaging; Postoperative complications; Radiography;

D O I：

10.1007/s13244-015-0438-5

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

This pictorial review aims to provide the radiologist with simple and systematic guidelines for the radiographic evaluation of a hip prosthesis. Currently, there is a plethora of commercially available arthroplasties, making postoperative analysis not always straightforward. Knowledge of the different types of hip arthroplasty and fixating techniques is a prerequisite for correct imaging interpretation. After identification of the type of arthroplasty, meticulous and systematic analysis of the following parameters on an anteroposterior standing pelvic radiograph should be undertaken: leg length, vertical and horizontal centre of rotation, lateral acetabular inclination, and femoral stem positioning. Additional orthogonal views may be useful to evaluate acetabular anteversion. Complications can be classified in three major groups: periprosthetic lucencies, sclerosis or bone proliferation, and component failure or fracture. Teaching Points • To give an overview of the different types of currently used hip arthroplasties. • To provide a simple framework for a systematic approach to postoperative radiographs. • To discuss radiographic findings of the most common complications. © 2015, The Author(s).

引用

页码：591 / 600

页数：9

共 36 条

[1]

National hospital discharge survey: 2010 table, procedures by selected patient characteristics, Available via, (2010)

[2]

Pivec R., Johnson A.J., Mears S.C., Mont M.A., Hip arthroplasty, Lancet, 380, 9855, pp. 1768-1777, (2012)

[3]

Hopley C., Stengel D., Ekkernkamp A., Et al., Primary total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older patients: systematic review, BMJ, (2010)

[4]

Charnley J., Arthroplasty of the hip: a new operation, Lancet, 1, pp. 1129-1132, (1961)

[5]

Manaster B.J., From the RSNA refresher courses: total hip arthroplasty—radiographic evaluation, RadioGraphics, 16, pp. 645-660, (1996)

[6]

Mulhall K.J., Masterson E., Burke T.E., Routine recovery room radiographs after total hip arthroplasty: ineffective for screening and unsuitable as baseline for longitudinal follow-up evaluation, J Arthroplasty, 19, 3, pp. 313-317, (2004)

[7]

White T.O., Dougall T.W., Arthroplasty of the hip. Leg length is not important, J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 84, 3, pp. 335-338, (2002)

[8]

Woolson S.T., Hartford J.M., Sawyer A., Results of a method of leg-length equalization for patients undergoing primary total hip replacement, J Arthroplasty, 14, pp. 159-164, (1999)

[9]

McCollum D.E., Gray W.J., Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: causes and prevention, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 261, pp. 159-170, (1990)

[10]

Khalily C., Lester D.K., Results of a tapered cementless femoral stem implanted in varus, J Arthroplasty, 17, pp. 463-466, (2012)

← 1 2 3 4 →