Literature DB >> 27578045

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

Vasco V Mascarenhas1, Paulo Rego2, Pedro Dantas3, Augusto Gaspar4, Francisco Soldado5, José G Consciência6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to use 3D computed tomography (CT) to define head-neck morphologic gender-specific and normative parameters in asymptomatic individuals and use the omega angle (Ω°) to provide quantification data on the location and radial extension of a cam deformity.
METHODS: We prospectively included 350 individuals and evaluated 188 asymptomatic hips that underwent semiautomated CT analysis. Different thresholds of alpha angle (α°) were considered in order to analyze cam morphology and determine Ω°. We calculated overall and gender-specific parameters for imaging signs of cam morphology (Ω° and circumferential α°).
RESULTS: The 95 % reference interval limits were beyond abnormal thresholds found in the literature for cam morphology. Specifically, α° at 3/1 o´clock were 46.9°/60.8° overall, 51.8°/65.4° for men and 45.7°/55.3° for women. Cam prevalence, magnitude, location, and epicenter were significantly gender different. Increasing α° correlated with higher Ω°, meaning that higher angles correspond to larger cam deformities.
CONCLUSION: Hip morphometry measurements in this cohort of asymptomatic individuals extended beyond current thresholds used for the clinical diagnosis of cam deformity, and α° was found to vary both by gender and measurement location. These results suggest that α° measurement is insufficient for the diagnosis of cam deformity. Enhanced morphometric evaluation, including 3D imaging and Ω°, may enable a more accurate diagnosis. KEY POINTS: • 95% reference interval limits of cam morphotype were beyond currently defined thresholds. • Current morphometric definitions for cam-type morphotype should be applied with care. • Cam prevalence, magnitude, location, and epicenter are significantly gender different. • Cam and alpha angle thresholds should be defined according to sex/location. • Quantitative 3D morphometric assessment allows thorough and reproducible FAI diagnosis and monitoring.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Femoroacetabular impingement; Hip; Multidetector computed tomography; Reference value; Variant

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27578045     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4530-0

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


  63 in total

Review 1.  Three-dimensional Imaging and Computer Navigation in Planning for Hip Preservation Surgery.

Authors:  Andrew W Kuhn; James R Ross; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  Sports Med Arthrosc Rev       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.985

2.  Radiographic evaluation of the hip has limited reliability.

Authors:  John C Clohisy; John C Carlisle; Robert Trousdale; Young-Jo Kim; Paul E Beaule; Patrick Morgan; Karen Steger-May; Perry L Schoenecker; Michael Millis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-12-02       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  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

4.  Femoroacetabular impingement: can the alpha angle be estimated?

Authors:  Mohamed R Nouh; Mark E Schweitzer; Leon Rybak; Jodi Cohen
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Validation of a standardized mapping system of the hip joint for radial MRA sequencing.

Authors:  Frank M Klenke; Daniel B Hoffmann; Brian J Cross; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Correlations between the alpha angle and femoral head asphericity: Implications and recommendations for the diagnosis of cam femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Michael D Harris; Ashley L Kapron; Christopher L Peters; Andrew E Anderson
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 3.528

7.  Are normal hips being labeled as pathologic? A CT-based method for defining normal acetabular coverage.

Authors:  Christopher M Larson; Alexandre Moreau-Gaudry; Bryan T Kelly; J W Thomas Byrd; Jérôme Tonetti; Stephane Lavallee; Laurence Chabanas; Guillaume Barrier; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Prevalence of radiographic markers of femoroacetabular impingement in asymptomatic adults.

Authors:  Rodrigo Benedet Scheidt; Carlos Roberto Galia; Cristiano Valter Diesel; Ricardo Rosito; Carlos Alberto de Souza Macedo
Journal:  Rev Col Bras Cir       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb

9.  Femoral morphology differs between deficient and excessive acetabular coverage.

Authors:  S D Steppacher; M Tannast; S Werlen; K A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-02-21       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Hip damage occurs at the zone of femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  M Tannast; D Goricki; M Beck; S B Murphy; K A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  8 in total

1.  The Lisbon Agreement on Femoroacetabular Impingement Imaging-part 3: imaging techniques.

Authors:  Miguel O Castro; Vasco V Mascarenhas; P Diana Afonso; Paulo Rego; Florian Schmaranzer; Reto Sutter; Ara Kassarjian; Luca Sconfienza; Michael Dienst; 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.  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

3.  Arthroscopic versus open treatment of cam-type femoro-acetabular impingement: retrospective cohort clinical study.

Authors:  Paulo A Rego; Vasco Mascarenhas; Filipe S Oliveira; Pedro C Pinto; Eduardo Sampaio; Jacinto Monteiro
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Automated Morphometric Analysis of the Hip Joint on MRI from the German National Cohort Study.

Authors:  Marc Fischer; Sven S Walter; Tobias Hepp; Manuela Zimmer; Mike Notohamiprodjo; Fritz Schick; Bin Yang
Journal:  Radiol Artif Intell       Date:  2021-06-02

5.  3D CT segmentation of CAM type femoroacetabular impingement-reliability and relationship of CAM lesion with anthropomorphic features.

Authors:  Lihua Zhang; Joel E Wells; Riham Dessouky; Adam Gleason; Rajiv Chopra; Yonatan Chatzinoff; Nicholas P Fey; Yin Xi; Avneesh Chhabra
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  A new quantitative 3D approach to imaging of structural joint disease.

Authors:  T D Turmezei; G M Treece; A H Gee; R Houlden; K E S Poole
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Extent of Cam Resection Relative to Epiphyseal Line and Its Association With Clinical Outcomes After Arthroscopic Treatment for Femoroacetabular Syndrome.

Authors:  Fan Yang; Hong-Jie Huang; Zi-Yi He; Yan Xu; Xin Zhang; Jian-Quan Wang
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2022-09-29

8.  MRI-based synthetic CT shows equivalence to conventional CT for the morphological assessment of the hip joint.

Authors:  Mateusz C Florkow; Koen Willemsen; Frank Zijlstra; Wouter Foppen; Bart C H van der Wal; Jochem R N van der Voort van Zyp; Max A Viergever; René M Castelein; Harrie Weinans; Marijn van Stralen; Ralph J B Sakkers; Peter R Seevinck
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 3.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.