Kilic Fox (packetsuit08)

c fractures managed with revision THA increased, whereas ORIF decreased. Our findings are encouraging considering the significant burden an increase in periprosthetic fracture incidence would present to the health care system in terms of both expense and patient morbidity. Constrained acetabular liners (CALs) are used in both primary and revision total hip arthroplasty in cases where stability and abductor deficiency are of concern. The efficacy of CALs has been shown to be design dependent. p53 inhibitor There is clear evidence that the use of small head sizes and shorter offset in unconstrained total hip arthroplasty is associated with higher rates of dislocation. To our knowledge, no such study has assessed the effect of femoral head size, neck length, and offset for CALs. We performed a retrospective study assessing the outcomes of CALs with minimum 2-year follow-up. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was conducted for all patients and for patients revised for instability. A binomial regression analysis was performed to assess for variables significantly associated with CAL failure. A total of 285 CALs in 281 patients were identified with a mean follow-up of 5.7 years. Ten-year Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were as follows all indication 91.9% vs instability 85.5% (P= .15). Increasing neck length was associated with lower rates of failure (odds ratio, 0.81; P= .042). Femoral head size, offset, and abductor reconstruction were not significantly associated with CAL failure. Larger head size has not been demonstrated to lead to lower failure in CALs. Increasing neck length was associated with lower failure rate. Surgeons should be cautious when attempting to ream to larger acetabular shell sizes for the purpose of using larger heads with CALs. Increasing neck length may instead be targeted intraoperatively. Larger head size has not been demonstrated to lead to lower failure in CALs. Increasing neck length was associated with lower failure rate. Surgeons should be cautious when attempting to ream to larger acetabular shell sizes for the purpose of using larger heads with CALs. Increasing neck length may instead be targeted intraoperatively. Computed tomography (CT) scan is the standard for assessment of femoral torsion. This observational study was conducted to evaluate the comparability of the EOS radiation dose scanning system (EOS imaging, Paris, France) and the CT scan in patients with suspected torsional malalignment of the femur. Patients with suspected torsional malalignment of the femur were included in a study for surgical planning. The primary endpoint was to compare the 3-dimensional radiological (EOS) imaging system with the CT scan to determine femoral anteversion (AV) angle. Three independent raters performed measurements. Comparability of CT scan and EOS values was assessed by Pearson correlation, t test, interobserver reliability, and intraobserver reliability (Cronbach alpha). About 34 femora were examined. Interobserver reliability/intraobserver reliability was 0.911 of 0.955 for EOS and 0.934 of 0.934 for CT scan. EOS system revealed an AV angle of 12.2° ± 10.0° (-15.0° to 32.0°). CT examinations showed an AV angle of 12.6° ± 9.2° (-3.2° to 35.6°). About 11 hips featured physiological AV, 14 hips showed decreased AV (<10°) or retroversion (<0°), and 9 hips showed increased AV (>20°). Overall, a strong Pearson correlation of τ= 0.855 and a highly significant correlation in the t test for both methods was seen. In patients with decreased AV, retroversion, or increased AV, Pearson correlation only resulted in a moderate/low correlation of τ= 0.495 and τ= 0.292. The t test showed no significant correlation at malrotation. In torsional malalignment, EOS does not have correlation with CT measurements. In contrast to CT scan, EOS allows femoral torsion measurement independent of legs' positioning. In torsio