Literature DB >> 27580735

What MRI Findings Predict Failure 10 Years After Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement?

Markus S Hanke1, Simon D Steppacher2, Helen Anwander2, Stefan Werlen3, Klaus A Siebenrock2, Moritz Tannast2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance arthrogram (MRA) with radial cuts is presently the best available preoperative imaging study to evaluate chondrolabral lesions in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Existing followup studies for surgical treatment of FAI have evaluated predictors of treatment failure based on preoperative clinical examination, intraoperative findings, and conventional radiography. However, to our knowledge, no study has examined whether any preoperative findings on MRA images might be associated with failure of surgical treatment of FAI in the long term. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were (1) to identify the preoperative MRA findings that are associated with conversion to THA, any progression of osteoarthritis, and/or a Harris hip score of < 80 points after acetabuloplasty and/or osteochondroplasty of the femoral head-neck junction through a surgical hip dislocation (SHD) for FAI at a minimum 10-year followup; and (2) identify the age of patients with symptomatic FAI when these secondary degenerative findings were detected on preoperative radial MRAs.
METHODS: We retrospectively studied 121 patients (146 hips) who underwent acetabuloplasty and/or osteochondroplasty of the femoral head-neck junction through SHD for symptomatic anterior FAI between July 2001 and March 2003. We excluded 35 patients (37 hips) with secondary FAI after previous surgery and 11 patients (12 hips) with Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease. All patients underwent preoperative MRA to further specify chondrolabral lesions except in 19 patients (32 hips) including 17 patients (20 hips) who presented with an MRI from an external institution taken with a different protocol, 10 patients with no preoperative MRA because the patients had already been operated on the contralateral side with a similar appearance, and two patients (two hips) refused MRA because of claustrophobia. This resulted in 56 patients (65 hips) with idiopathic FAI and a preoperative MRA. Of those, three patients (three hips) did not have minimal 10-year followup (one patient died; two hips with followup between 5 and 6 years). The remaining patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically at a mean followup of 11 years (range, 10-13 years). Thirteen pathologic radiographic findings on the preoperative MRA were evaluated for an association with the following endpoints using Cox regression analysis: conversion to THA, radiographic evidence of any progression of osteoarthritis, and/or a Harris hip score of < 80. The age of the patient when each degenerative pattern was found on the preoperative MRA was recorded.
RESULTS: The following MRI findings were associated with one or more of our predefined failure endpoints: cartilage damage exceeding 60° of the circumference had a hazard ratio (HR) of 4.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-5.6; p = 0.003) compared with a damage of less than 60°, presence of an acetabular rim cyst had a HR of 4.1 (95% CI, 3.1-5.2; p = 0.008) compared with hips without these cysts, and presence of a sabertooth osteophyte had a HR of 3.2 (95% CI, 2.3-4.2; p = 0.013) compared with hips without a sabertooth osteophyte. The degenerative pattern associated with the youngest patient age when detected on preoperative MRA was the sabertooth osteophyte (lower quartile 27 years) followed by cartilage damage exceeding 60° of the circumference (28 years) and the presence of an acetabular rim bone cyst (31 years).
CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative MRAs with radial cuts reveal important findings that may be associated with future failure of surgical treatment for FAI. Most of these factors are not visible on conventional radiographs or standard hip MRIs. Preoperative MRA evaluation is therefore strongly recommended on a routine basis for patients undergoing these procedures. Findings associated with conversion to arthroplasty, radiographic evidence of any progression of osteoarthritis, and/or a Harris hip score of < 80 points should be incorporated into the decision-making process in patients being evaluated for joint-preserving hip surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27580735      PMCID: PMC5339116          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-5040-8

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


  67 in total

1.  Arthroscopic debridement versus refixation of the acetabular labrum associated with femoroacetabular impingement: mean 3.5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Christopher M Larson; M Russell Giveans; Rebecca M Stone
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2012-02-03       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  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

3.  Ischial spine projection into the pelvis : a new sign for acetabular retroversion.

Authors:  Fabian Kalberer; Rafael J Sierra; Sanjeev S Madan; Reinhold Ganz; Michael Leunig
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-02-10       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Bone apposition of the acetabular rim in deep hips: a distinct finding of global pincer impingement.

Authors:  Kristoff Corten; Reinhold Ganz; Etsuo Chosa; Michael Leunig
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  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

6.  Herniation pit of the femoral neck.

Authors:  M J Pitt; A R Graham; J H Shipman; W Birkby
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1982-06       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Midterm results of surgical hip dislocation for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Florian D Naal; Hermes H Miozzari; Michael Schär; Tobias Hesper; Hubert P Nötzli
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2012-05-03       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  Radiographic progression of hospital referred osteoarthritis of the hip.

Authors:  J Ledingham; S Dawson; B Preston; G Milligan; M Doherty
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 19.103

9.  Assessing activity in joint replacement patients.

Authors:  C A Zahiri; T P Schmalzried; E S Szuszczewicz; H C Amstutz
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 4.757

10.  Surgical hip dislocation does not result in atrophy or fatty infiltration of periarticular hip muscles.

Authors:  Aaron A Glynn; Fabio Y Barattiero; Christoph E Albers; Markus S Hanke; Simon D Steppacher; Moritz Tannast
Journal:  J Hip Preserv Surg       Date:  2014-10-07
View more
  16 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.  Osseous spurs at the fovea capitis femoris-a frequent finding in asymptomatic volunteers.

Authors:  Susanne Bensler; Christoph A Agten; Christian W A Pfirrmann; Reto Sutter
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Automatic MRI-based Three-dimensional Models of Hip Cartilage Provide Improved Morphologic and Biochemical Analysis.

Authors:  Florian Schmaranzer; Ronja Helfenstein; Guodong Zeng; Till D Lerch; Eduardo N Novais; James D Wylie; Young-Jo Kim; Klaus A Siebenrock; Moritz Tannast; Guoyan Zheng
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  [Treatment options for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and osteoarthritis].

Authors:  Patrick Weber; Hans Gollwitzer
Journal:  Orthopadie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-05-23

5.  The New Bern Chondrolabral Classification Is Reliable and Reproducible.

Authors:  Takeaki Yamamoto; Corinne A Zurmühle; Vera M Stetzelberger; Joseph M Schwab; Simon D Steppacher; Moritz Tannast
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  CORR Insights®: Is There a Scientific Rationale for the Refixation of Delaminated Chondral Flaps in Femoroacetabular Impingement? A Laboratory Study.

Authors:  Travis G Maak
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 4.755

7.  Evaluation of hip arthroscopy using a hip-specific distractor for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Tatiana Charles; Marc Jayankura
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Prevalence of early hip OA features on MRI in high-impact athletes. The femoroacetabular impingement and hip osteoarthritis cohort (FORCe) study.

Authors:  J J Heerey; R Srinivasan; R Agricola; A Smith; J L Kemp; T Pizzari; M G King; P R Lawrenson; M J Scholes; R B Souza; T Link; S Majumdar; K M Crossley
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 6.576

9.  Best Practices: Hip Femoroacetabular Impingement.

Authors:  Florian Schmaranzer; Arvin B Kheterpal; Miriam A Bredella
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 10.  Complications of hip preserving surgery.

Authors:  Markus S Hanke; Till D Lerch; Florian Schmaranzer; Malin K Meier; Simon D Steppacher; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2021-06-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.