English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Recommendations for cup containment and impingement may provide conflicting directions for component orientation in total hip arthroplasty. For optimal containment, the cup is positioned with respect to the acetabular bone, resulting in coincidence of the rim of the cup and the acetabulum. This results in good coverage and symmetric load transfer, leading to good long-term stability, but occasionally necessitates more abduction of the cup than that recommended by the safe zone. On the other hand, placement of the cup for an optimal range of motion would lead to only partial containment, with a higher risk of component loosening and revision. The most effective compromise is to use a prosthesis that has a large safe zone, realised by a high head-to-neck ratio, and orienting the cup such that a good containment is achieved and the safe zone is respected. Computer navigation or smart aiming devices may help to find the best relative orientation.

Containment versus impingement: finding a compromise for cup placement in total hip arthroplasty