Association of S2 Alar–Iliac Versus S1-Only Fixation with Spinopelvic Mobility and Acetabular Component Orientation in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Standing–Sitting EOS Study
- 1Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Demiroglu Bilim University, 34381 Istanbul, Turkey
- 2Scoliosis and Spine Center—Istanbul, Istanbul Florence Nightingale Hospital, 34381 Istanbul, Turkey
Abstract
Background: S2 alar–iliac (S2AI) fixation crosses the sacroiliac joint, unlike fixation terminating at S1, and may be associated with reduced spinopelvic mobility in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). We compared spinopelvic mobility, femoropelvic reorientation, acetabular component orientation, and hip-specific function between S2AI and S1-only fixation. Methods: This retrospective comparative cohort study included 60 patients undergoing THA after adult spinal fusion with S2AI (n = 30) or S1-only (n = 30) fixation. Standing and sitting EOS imaging at 1 year assessed changes in sacral slope (ΔSS) and pelvic–femoral angle (ΔPFA). Immediate postoperative CT measured static acetabular component orientation. Hip-specific function was assessed using the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Multivariable regression evaluated associations with ΔSS and HOOS. Results: Spinopelvic stiffness (ΔSS < 10°) was more frequent with S2AI fixation (66.7% vs. 13.3%; p < 0.001). Compared with S1-only fixation, S2AI was associated with lower ΔSS (7.7 ± 4.8° vs. 18.1 ± 7.0°; p < 0.001) and greater ΔPFA (68.8 ± 11.7° vs. 58.7 ± 10.8°; p = 0.001). Static cup orientation was similar. One-year HOOS was lower with S2AI fixation (79 [68–86] vs. 86 [72–92]; p = 0.01), although ΔHOOS did not differ significantly (p = 0.07). After adjustment, S2AI fixation remained associated with lower ΔSS (β = −7.67; p < 0.001), while greater ΔSS was associated with higher HOOS (β = 3.42 per 5°; p = 0.003). Conclusions: S2AI fixation was associated with reduced spinopelvic mobility and greater femoropelvic reorientation despite similar static cup orientation. Residual confounding by spinal construct complexity precludes causal inference.
Related
- Comparing Short-Term Clinical Outcomes and Survivorship of Complex Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Custom Triflange Acetabular Implants Vs Standard Cage Reconstruction
- Increased Accuracy of Acetabular Cup Positioning with an Automatic Impaction Device in Total Hip Arthroplasty
- Catastrophic acetabular wear following polyethylene liner dissociation with locking-tab damage after total hip arthroplasty: a case report
- Fluoroscopy Computer Navigation Versus Manual Fluoroscopic Acetabular Positioning in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty: Safe Zone Compliance and Learning Curve Analysis.
- Burch-Schneider Ring Alone Vs Cup-Cage Construct in Massive Acetabular Bone Defect in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty
BibTeX
@article{abay2026association,
title = {{Association of S2 Alar–Iliac Versus S1-Only Fixation with Spinopelvic Mobility and Acetabular Component Orientation in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Standing–Sitting EOS Study}},
author = {Burak Abay and Meric Enercan and Azmi Hamzaoglu},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15218210},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8210},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Association of S2 Alar–Iliac Versus S1-Only Fixation with Spinopelvic Mobility and Acetabular Component Orientation in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Standing–Sitting EOS Study
AU - Burak Abay
AU - Meric Enercan
AU - Azmi Hamzaoglu
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/22
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15218210
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8210
AB - Background: S2 alar–iliac (S2AI) fixation crosses the sacroiliac joint, unlike fixation terminating at S1, and may be associated with reduced spinopelvic mobility in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). We compared spinopelvic mobility, femoropelvic reorientation, acetabular component orientation, and hip-specific function between S2AI and S1-only fixation. Methods: This retrospective comparative cohort study included 60 patients undergoing THA after adult spinal fusion with S2AI (n = 30) or S1-only (n = 30) fixation. Standing and sitting EOS imaging at 1 year assessed changes in sacral slope (ΔSS) and pelvic–femoral angle (ΔPFA). Immediate postoperative CT measured static acetabular component orientation. Hip-specific function was assessed using the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Multivariable regression evaluated associations with ΔSS and HOOS. Results: Spinopelvic stiffness (ΔSS < 10°) was more frequent with S2AI fixation (66.7% vs. 13.3%; p < 0.001). Compared with S1-only fixation, S2AI was associated with lower ΔSS (7.7 ± 4.8° vs. 18.1 ± 7.0°; p < 0.001) and greater ΔPFA (68.8 ± 11.7° vs. 58.7 ± 10.8°; p = 0.001). Static cup orientation was similar. One-year HOOS was lower with S2AI fixation (79 [68–86] vs. 86 [72–92]; p = 0.01), although ΔHOOS did not differ significantly (p = 0.07). After adjustment, S2AI fixation remained associated with lower ΔSS (β = −7.67; p < 0.001), while greater ΔSS was associated with higher HOOS (β = 3.42 per 5°; p = 0.003). Conclusions: S2AI fixation was associated with reduced spinopelvic mobility and greater femoropelvic reorientation despite similar static cup orientation. Residual confounding by spinal construct complexity precludes causal inference.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -