ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Three-dimensional pelvic kinematics in healthy, total hip arthroplasty, and lumbar fusion patients using stereo-radiography.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Measuring pelvic tilt and pelvic obliquity during functional positions is important for surgical planning of total hip arthroplasty as these orientations affect optimal acetabular cup position and post-operative hip stability. The objective of this study was to compare pelvic tilt, pelvic obliquity, and pelvic mobility across 3 cohorts of age-matched patients: 1) healthy controls 2) THA patients without spinal fusion and 3) patients with instrumented spinal fusions. We hypothesized that (1) the healthy and THA cohorts would demonstrate similar pelvic mobility across the range of position demand and (2) individuals with spinal fusions would have significantly less pelvic mobility than both the healthy and THA cohorts. Methods: We compared 10 patients in each of these cohorts using stereo radiography to quantify pelvic tilt and pelvic obliquity across a range of clinically relevant poses of varying demand on pelvic mobility. Results: Results demonstrated that the overall pelvic mobility of the spinal fusion cohort was consistently similar in magnitude to health controls but biased anteriorly by 6.5% and 33.5% compared to the healthy and total hip cohorts, primarily due to less posterior tilting across the functional positions (Healthy: 39.6° ± 10.2°; Spinal fusion: 39.5° ± 7.3°; Total hip: 37.8° ± 7.6°). Obliquity angles varied substantially between some clinically relevant pose combinations. Low and high coronal plane mobility patients were identified in each of the three cohorts, with mobility ranging between 4.4° and 28.3°, respectively, across positions. Discussion: Substantial intragroup variability was exhibited within each cohort across the six functional poses, highlighting the patient-specific nature of the spinopelvic relationship regardless of previous surgery at the hip or spine. The larger pelvic tilt angles demonstrated during more demanding poses in seated and standing highlights the importance of imaging patients in poses that capture the full extent of pelvic mobility.
Indexed as
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.