Literature DB >> 24770465

Femoroacetabular impingement: normal values of the quantitative morphometric parameters in asymptomatic hips.

Marianne Lepage-Saucier1, Cécile Thiéry, Ahmed Larbi, Frédéric E Lecouvet, Bruno C Vande Berg, Patrick Omoumi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the means and the reference intervals of the quantitative morphometric parameters of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in normal hips with high-resolution computed tomography (CT).
METHODS: We prospectively included 94 adult individuals who underwent CT for thoracic, abdominal or urologic pathologies. Patients with a clinical history of hip pathology and/or with osteoarthritis on CT were excluded. We calculated means and 95% reference intervals for imaging signs of cam-type (alpha angle at 90° and 45° and femoral head-neck offset) and pincer-type impingement (acetabular version angle, lateral centre-edge angle and acetabular index).
RESULTS: The 95 % reference interval limits were all far beyond the abnormal thresholds found in the literature for cam-type and to a lesser extent for pincer-type FAI. The upper limits of the reference intervals for the alpha angles (at 90°/45°) were 68°/83° (men) and 69°/84° (women), compared to thresholds from the literature (50°, 55° or 60°). Reference intervals were similar between genders for cam-type parameters, and slightly differed for pincer-type.
CONCLUSION: The 95% reference intervals of morphometric measurements of FAI in asymptomatic hips were beyond the abnormal thresholds, which was especially true for cam-type FAI. Our results suggest the need for redefining the current morphometric parameters used in the diagnosis of FAI. KEY POINTS: • 95% reference intervals limits of FAI morphotype were beyond currently defined thresholds. • Reference intervals of pincer-type morphotype measurements were close to current definitions. • Reference intervals of cam-type morphotype measurements were far beyond the current definitions. • Current morphometric definitions of cam-type morphotype should be used with care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24770465     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3171-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  32 in total

Review 1.  Acetabular and femoral anteversion: relationship with osteoarthritis of the hip.

Authors:  D Tönnis; A Heinecke
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 2.  Relationship of acetabular dysplasia and femoroacetabular impingement to hip osteoarthritis: a focused review.

Authors:  Marcie Harris-Hayes; Nathaniel K Royer
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.298

Review 3.  Femoroacetabular impingement: radiographic diagnosis--what the radiologist should know.

Authors:  Moritz Tannast; Klaus A Siebenrock; Suzanne E Anderson
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  A systematic approach to the plain radiographic evaluation of the young adult hip.

Authors:  John C Clohisy; John C Carlisle; Paul E Beaulé; Young-Jo Kim; Robert T Trousdale; Rafael J Sierra; Michael Leunig; Perry L Schoenecker; Michael B Millis
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Radiographic signs associated with femoroacetabular impingement occur with high prevalence at all ages in a hospital population.

Authors:  F de Bruin; M Reijnierse; V Farhang-Razi; J L Bloem
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-06-16       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Efficacy of surgery for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Vincent Y Ng; Naveen Arora; Thomas M Best; Xueliang Pan; Thomas J Ellis
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-05-20       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  Prevalence of cam-type deformity on hip magnetic resonance imaging in young males: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Stephan Reichenbach; Peter Jüni; Stefan Werlen; Eveline Nüesch; Christian W Pfirrmann; Sven Trelle; Alex Odermatt; Willy Hofstetter; Reinhold Ganz; Michael Leunig
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.794

Review 8.  Femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Ara Kassarjian; Mélanie Brisson; William E Palmer
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2007-05-07       Impact factor: 3.528

9.  Early osteoarthritic changes of human femoral head cartilage subsequent to femoro-acetabular impingement.

Authors:  S Wagner; W Hofstetter; M Chiquet; P Mainil-Varlet; E Stauffer; R Ganz; K A Siebenrock
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 6.576

10.  Anatomic features associated with femoroacetabular impingement are equally common in hips of old and young asymptomatic individuals without CT signs of osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Patrick Omoumi; Cécile Thiery; Nicolas Michoux; Jacques Malghem; Frédéric E Lecouvet; Bruno C Vande Berg
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2014-03-24       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  18 in total

1.  Treatment of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Gennaro Fiorentino; Alberto Fontanarosa; Riccardo Cepparulo; Alberto Guardoli; Luca Berni; Gianluca Coviello; Aldo Guardoli
Journal:  Joints       Date:  2015-11-03

2.  Comparison of femoroacetabular impingement-related radiographic features in a convenience sample of Japanese patients with and without herniation pits.

Authors:  Kazuaki Mineta; Tomohiro Goto; Keizo Wada; Yasuaki Tamaki; Daisuke Hamada; Kosaku Higashino; Koichi Sairyo
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  What are the radiographic reference values for acetabular under- and overcoverage?

Authors:  Moritz Tannast; Markus S Hanke; Guoyan Zheng; Simon D Steppacher; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Hip shape is symmetric, non-dependent on limb dominance and gender-specific: implications for femoroacetabular impingement. A 3D CT analysis in asymptomatic subjects.

Authors:  Vasco V Mascarenhas; Paulo Rego; Pedro Dantas; Miguel Castro; Lennart Jans; Rui M Marques; Nélia Gouveia; Francisco Soldado; Olufemi R Ayeni; José G Consciência
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  What Are the Reference Values and Associated Factors for Center-edge Angle and Alpha Angle? A Population-based Study.

Authors:  Cornelius Sebastian Fischer; Jens-Peter Kühn; Till Ittermann; Carsten-Oliver Schmidt; Denis Gümbel; Richard Kasch; Matthias Frank; René Laqua; Peter Hinz; Jörn Lange
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Patellofemoral morphology and alignment: reference values and dose-response patterns for the relation to MRI features of patellofemoral osteoarthritis.

Authors:  E M Macri; D T Felson; Y Zhang; A Guermazi; F W Roemer; K M Crossley; K M Khan; J J Stefanik
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 6.576

7.  Risk factors for early symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement following in situ fixation of slipped capital femoral epiphysis.

Authors:  Melissa M Allen; Ramesh B Ghanta; Matthew Lahey; Scott B Rosenfeld
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2022-04-01

8.  Cam deformity and the omega angle, a novel quantitative measurement of femoral head-neck morphology: a 3D CT gender analysis in asymptomatic subjects.

Authors:  Vasco V Mascarenhas; Paulo Rego; Pedro Dantas; Augusto Gaspar; Francisco Soldado; José G Consciência
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Do Neuromuscular Alterations Exist for Patients With Acetabular Labral Tears During Function?

Authors:  Maureen K Dwyer; Cara L Lewis; Alfred W Hanmer; Joseph C McCarthy
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 4.772

10.  Bony morphology of the hip in professional ballet dancers compared to athletes.

Authors:  Susan Mayes; April-Rose Ferris; Peter Smith; Andrew Garnham; Jill Cook
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-12-12       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.