Skip to main content

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Table 3 The correlations between the reconstructive parameters and the native morphology for each stem design (only fair correlations are reported)

From: Which stem in total hip arthroplasty for developmental hip dysplasia? A comparative study using a 3D CT-based software for pre-operative surgical planning

Reconstructive parameter Stem design
Single wedge Anatomical Conical
Combined anteversion Femoral anteversion (Pearson’s r = − 0.295, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation) Femoral anteversion (Pearson’s r = − 0.274, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation) No correlations
Offset reconstruction No correlations No correlations Offset (Pearson’s r = − 0.257, p 0.0002: fair inverse correlation)
Coronal and sagittal tilt No correlations No correlations No correlations
Canal filling No correlations No correlations No correlations
Leg lengthening Center of rotation height (Pearson’s r = − 0.308, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation) Center of rotation height (Pearson’s r = − 0.361, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation) Center of rotation height (Pearson’s r = − 0.450, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation)
Neck-shaft angle (Pearson’s r = 0.270, p 0.0001: fair correlation)
Calcar femorale (Pearson’s r = − 0.266, p 0.0001: fair inverse correlation) Center of rotation height (Pearson’s r = − 0.361, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation) Center of rotation height (Pearson’s r = − 0.450, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation)
Acceptability Femoral anteversion (Pearson’s r = − 0.334, p < 0.0001: fair inverse correlation) Femoral anteversion (Pearson’s r = − 0.253, p 0.0003: fair inverse correlation) No correlations
Calcar femorale (Pearson’s r = − 0.240, p 0.0006: poor correlation)