Literature DB >> 26913511

Supine and Standing AP Pelvis Radiographs in the Evaluation of Pincer Femoroacetabular Impingement.

Timothy J Jackson1, Allyson A Estess2, Gregory J Adamson2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pelvic tilt can affect the presence of the ischial spine sign and crossover sign. Numerous studies of pelvic tilt on radiographic measurements of pincer impingement have shown that increasing anterior tilt is associated with more radiographic signs of pincer impingement. However, to our knowledge, no study has directly compared supine and standing plain radiographs in patients with respect to lateral center-edge (LCE) angle, acetabular inclination, crossover sign, and ischial spine sign. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences in supine and standing AP pelvis radiographs as they relate to the radiographic parameters of pincer impingement in an adult population evaluated for femoroacetabular impingement, specifically intrapelvic distances (sacrococcygeal to symphysis [SC-S] and coccyx tip to symphysis [T-S]), crossover sign (presence and percentage), LCE angle, inclination, and ischial spine sign.
METHODS: Between August 2013 and June 2014, we obtained supine and standing radiographs for all new patients younger than 60 years who were evaluated for hip pain, when the diagnosis of fracture was not being considered; these formed the basis of this retrospective study. Patients were excluded if they had arthritis (Tönnis grade ≥ 2), lumbar fusion, previous hip surgery, or malrotated films. Forty-six hips, symptomatic side, met the inclusion criteria (age of patients, 33 ± 14 years; 13 males, 33 females). Radiographic data that were collected included SC-S distance, T-S distance, LCE angle, acetabular inclination, presence and percentage of crossover sign, and presence of ischial spine sign. A paired t-test was used to compare continuous variables and chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Two independent readers performed measurements.
RESULTS: From supine to standing films, the T-S distance decreased from 19 ± 18 mm to 6 ± 19 mm (p < 0.001), and SC-S distance decreased from 47 ± 19 mm to 32 ± 20 mm (p < 0.001), indicating less pelvic tilt in the standing position. The number of hips that had crossover signs decreased from supine (n = 18, 39%) to standing (n = 9, 20%) (p = 0.039). The amount of crossover decreased from 23% ± 10% to 11% ±13% (p < 0.001). LCE angle did not change (27° ± 7° to 27° ± 8°) (p = 0.64) and inclination angle increased by a small amount (4.2° ± 5° to 5.3° ± 5°) (p = 0.002). The ischial spine sign decreased from supine (n = 20, 43%) to standing (n = 7, 15%) position (p = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: There is a decrease in the amount of pelvic tilt on standing AP pelvis radiographs resulting in a decrease in the incidence and amount of crossover sign and ischial spine sign, and a small increase in inclination. Standing radiographs should be the standard in evaluation of nonarthritic hip pain, specifically pincer femoroacetabular impingement. Surgeons should use caution in interpreting supine AP radiographs in the evaluation of pincer impingement, specifically the crossover sign. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26913511      PMCID: PMC4887365          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-4766-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  13 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

2.  Effect of pelvic tilt on acetabular retroversion: a study of pelves from cadavers.

Authors:  K A Siebenrock; D F Kalbermatten; R Ganz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Tilt and rotation correction of acetabular version on pelvic radiographs.

Authors:  M Tannast; G Zheng; C Anderegg; K Burckhardt; F Langlotz; R Ganz; K A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.176

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.  Estimation of pelvic tilt on anteroposterior X-rays--a comparison of six parameters.

Authors:  M Tannast; S B Murphy; F Langlotz; S E Anderson; K A Siebenrock
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2005-12-20       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Functional acetabular orientation varies between supine and standing radiographs: implications for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  James R Ross; Eric P Tannenbaum; Jeffrey J Nepple; Bryan T Kelly; Christopher M Larson; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Effects of acetabular rim trimming on hip joint contact pressures: how much is too much?

Authors:  Sanjeev Bhatia; Simon Lee; Elizabeth Shewman; Richard C Mather; Michael J Salata; Charles A Bush-Joseph; Shane J Nho
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  Effect of changes in pelvic tilt on range of motion to impingement and radiographic parameters of acetabular morphologic characteristics.

Authors:  James R Ross; Jeffrey J Nepple; Marc J Philippon; Bryan T Kelly; Christopher M Larson; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2014-07-24       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  The ischial spine sign: does pelvic tilt and rotation matter?

Authors:  Diganta K Kakaty; Andreas F Fischer; Harish S Hosalkar; Klaus A Siebenrock; Moritz Tannast
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-08-07       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  [Differentiation of normal and pathological acetabular roof angle in the diagnosis of hip dysplasia. Evaluation of 2294 acetabular roof angles of hip joints in children].

Authors:  D Tönnis; D Brunken
Journal:  Arch Orthop Unfallchir       Date:  1968
View more
  7 in total

1.  The Lisbon Agreement on femoroacetabular impingement imaging-part 2: general issues, parameters, and reporting.

Authors:  Vasco V Mascarenhas; Miguel O Castro; P Diana Afonso; Paulo Rego; Michael Dienst; Reto Sutter; Florian Schmaranzer; Luca Sconfienza; Ara Kassarjian; Olufemi R Ayeni; Paul E Beaulé; Pedro Dantas; Radhesh Lalam; Marc-André Weber; Filip M Vanhoenacker; Tobias Johannes Dietrich; Lennart Jans; Philip Robinson; Apostolos H Karantanas; Iwona Sudoł-Szopińska; Suzanne Anderson; Iris Noebauer-Huhmann; Oliver Marin-Peña; Diego Collado; Marc Tey-Pons; Ehrenfried Schmaranzer; Mario Padron; Josef Kramer; Patrick O Zingg; Michel De Maeseneer; Eva Llopis
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Evaluation of Crossover Sign in Pelvis Models Made with a Three-Dimensional Printer.

Authors:  Amirhossein Salimi; Seyed Peyman Mirghaderi; Mohammad Javad Gholamzadeh; Reihane Qahremani; Alireza Hadizadeh; Reza Shahriarirad; Hesan Jelodari Mamaghani; Javad Dehghani; Maryam Salimi
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2022-05-26

3.  Comparing the supine and erect pelvis radiographic examinations: an evaluation of anatomy, image quality and radiation dose.

Authors:  Kevin Flintham; Kholoud Alzyoud; Andrew England; Peter Hogg; Beverly Snaith
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 3.629

Review 4.  Preoperative planning for redirective, periacetabular osteotomies.

Authors:  Christoph E Albers; Piet Rogers; Nicholas Wambeek; Sufian S Ahmad; Piers J Yates; Gareth H Prosser
Journal:  J Hip Preserv Surg       Date:  2017-09-14

Review 5.  Radiographic Diagnosis of Pincer-Type Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Chanseok Rhee; Tina Le Francois; J W Thomas Byrd; Mark Glazebrook; Ivan Wong
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2017-05-31

6.  Ottawa classification for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia assessment of interobserver and intraobserver reliability.

Authors:  K Bali; K Smit; M Ibrahim; S Poitras; G Wilkin; R Galmiche; E Belzile; P E Beaulé
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 5.853

7.  Full-length standing radiographs can be used for determination of the Femoral neck-shaft angle but not acetabular coverage.

Authors:  Sufian S Ahmad; Christian Konrads; Annika Steinmeier; Max Ettinger; Henning Windhagen; Gregor M Giebel
Journal:  SICOT J       Date:  2022-08-24
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.