ArticleBone & joint open2025
Functional pelvic tilt frequently differs from the anterior pelvic plane in non-arthritic hip disorders : implications for 3D motion analysis.
Article in Bone & joint open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bridging postural biomechanics and knee arthroplasty success.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Hip preservation surgeons are increasingly using commercially available 3D motion analysis software to investigate areas of impingement and quantify femoral head coverage. Variations in functional pelvic tilt will affect the position of the acetabular rim and projected femoral head coverage, but currently the majority of available software standardizes sagittal rotation to the anterior pelvic plane (APP). The study hypothesis was that the APP does not correlate well with patient-specific pelvic position. Methods: In total, 60 patients were selected from an institutional database: 20 with acetabular retroversion (AR), 20 with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), and 20 with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Multiplanar CT reformats were created and the sagittal rotation was aligned to the APP. The sagittal pelvic orientation was then corrected until the anteroposterior (AP) projection mirrored that of their preoperative supine and standing plain radiographs. The change in sagittal pelvic tilt angle required was measured. Results: The mean deviation from the APP in the AR group was 11.55° (SD 4.96°) for supine radiographs and 3.28° (SD 8.66°) for standing radiographs. The mean deviation from the APP in the DDH group was 12.2° (SD 4.26°) for supine radiographs and 6.96° (SD 3.43°) for standing radiographs. The main deviation from the APP in the FAI group was 8.63° (SD 5.21°) for supine radiographs and -1.28° (SD 7.31°) for standing. Conclusion: There is a wide variation in patients' functional pelvic positioning in both supine and standing radiographs, in all different subgroups, which rarely correlates with the APP. Commercial 3D motion analysis may therefore give misleading results for both the extent and location of hip impingement as well as femoral head coverage, which may affect surgical decision-making. Consideration should be given to incorporating this into the software algorithms.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.