Measuring stem anteversion after total hip arthroplasty: posterior condylar tangent versus transepicondylar axis.

OBJECTIVE Stem anteversion in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been measured using two different distal references, the posterior condyle (PC) or the transepicondylar axis (TEA). The reliability, the difference in value between these two techniques, and the possible confounding factors are scarcely known. Aims of this work were to assess (1) the intraclass correlation and the difference between the two measurement techniques and (2) the possible influence of condylar dysmorphisms on the anteversion value discrepancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A consecutive series of post-THA CT scans were selected, excluding hip dysplasia, end-stage knee osteoarthritis, and replaced knees. Using a surgical planning software, stem anteversion was measured using the PC or the TEA reference. The intraclass reliability was assessed. The anteroposterior femoral condyle diameters were measured: the difference and the ratio were measured and correlated with the stem anteversion values. RESULTS 91 CT scans were included. Inter/intra-observer TEA measurements were more reliable than PC. The intraclass correlation between PC and TEA anteversion measurements was good, 0.954 (CI 95% 0.922-0965). The mean difference between PC and TEA anteversion was 5.27 ± 2.41°. The difference and the ratio between the two anteroposterior condyle diameters did not influence the anteversion difference (respectively, p 0.797 and p 0.901). CONCLUSIONS TEA and PC demonstrated to achieve a good correlation, not dependent from the condyle morphology. However, the difference between the two measurements (5°) can severely influence the combined anteversion (10-20%): due to clinical applicability and better inter/intra-observer agreement, TEA should be preferred for measuring stem anteversion.