Imaging Methodology for Hip Preservation: Techniques, Parameters, and Thresholds

Abstract

The concept of hip impingement and hip-preserving surgery has been appreciated in more detail since 2001 when a new surgical approach was reported and a hypothesis linking femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with osteoarthritis was presented. Paralleling the introduction of hip arthroscopy, these events led to an increasing interest in the hip, and the number of publications has risen rapidly over the past 15 years, despite limited evidence levels and inconsistent methodology. Accordingly, etiology, diagnosis, prognosis, and the effects of treatment for FAI are still elusive due to a number of uncertainties and a lack of clear diagnostic criteria.

Future research must focus on developing high-quality scientific studies, so thorough and reproducible methodology is needed. This review provides researchers, radiologists, and clinicians with a comprehensive approach to hip imaging with a focus on strategies to help guide the clinical diagnosis. Using evidence from current literature and knowledge from experienced clinicians, some of the imaging methodology challenges are deciphered.

Keywords

imaging - methodology - reference intervals - femoroacetabular impingement - hip preservation

• References

• 1 Tijssen M, van Cingel R, Willemsen L, de Visser E. Diagnostics of femoroacetabular impingement and labral pathology of the hip: a systematic review of the accuracy and validity of physical tests. Arthroscopy 2012; 28 (06) 860-871
• 2 Burnett RSJ, Della Rocca GJ, Prather H, Curry M, Maloney WJ, Clohisy JC. Clinical presentation of patients with tears of the acetabular labrum. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (07) 1448-1457
• 3 Martin HD, Kelly BT, Leunig M. , et al. The pattern and technique in the clinical evaluation of the adult hip: the common physical examination tests of hip specialists. Arthroscopy 2010; 26 (02) 161-172
• 4 Griffin DR, Dickenson EJ, O'Donnell J. , et al. The Warwick Agreement on femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI syndrome): an international consensus statement. Br J Sports Med 2016; 50 (19) 1169-1176
• 5 Mascarenhas VV, Rego P, Dantas P. , et al. Imaging prevalence of femoroacetabular impingement in symptomatic patients, athletes, and asymptomatic individuals: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85 (01) 73-95
• 6 Dickenson E, Wall PDH, Robinson B. , et al. Prevalence of cam hip shape morphology: a systematic review. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2016; 24 (06) 949-961
• 7 Sutter R, Stoel BC, Buck FM. , et al. Internal derangements of joints—past, present, and future. Invest Radiol 2015; 50 (09) 601-614
• 8 Sutter R, Pfirrmann CWA. Update on femoroacetabular impingement: what is new, and how should we assess it?. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2017; 21 (05) 518-528
• 9 Clohisy JC, Carlisle JC, Beaulé PE. , et al. A systematic approach to the plain radiographic evaluation of the young adult hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (Suppl. 04) 47-66
• 10 Mast NH, Impellizzeri F, Keller S, Leunig M. Reliability and agreement of measures used in radiographic evaluation of the adult hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (01) 188-199
• 11 Ayeni OR, Chan K, Whelan DB. , et al. Diagnosing femoroacetabular impingement from plain radiographs: do radiologists and orthopaedic surgeons differ?. Orthop J Sports Med 2014; 2 (07) 2325967114541414
• 12 Nepple JJ, Martel JM, Kim YJ, Zaltz I, Clohisy JC. ; ANCHOR Study Group. Do plain radiographs correlate with CT for imaging of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (12) 3313-3320
• 13 Atkins PR, Shin Y, Agrawal P. , et al. Which two-dimensional radiographic measurements of cam femoroacetabular impingement best describe the three-dimensional shape of the proximal femur?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2019; 477 (01) 242-253
• 14 Smith KM, Gerrie BJ, McCulloch PC, Lintner DM, Harris JD. Comparison of MRI, CT, Dunn 45° and Dunn 90° alpha angle measurements in femoroacetabular impingement. Hip Int 2018; 28 (04) 450-455
• 15 Rakhra KS, Sheikh AM, Allen D, Beaulé PE. Comparison of MRI alpha angle measurement planes in femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467 (03) 660-665
• 16 Bouma HW, Hogervorst T, Audenaert E, Krekel P, van Kampen PM. Can combining femoral and acetabular morphology parameters improve the characterization of femoroacetabular impingement?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (04) 1396-1403
• 17 Laborie LB, Engesæter IØ, Lehmann TG. , et al. Radiographic measurements of hip dysplasia at skeletal maturity—new reference intervals based on 2,038 19-year-old Norwegians. Skeletal Radiol 2013; 42 (07) 925-935
• 18 Agricola R, Heijboer MP, Bierma-Zeinstra SMA, Verhaar JAN, Weinans H, Waarsing JH. Cam impingement causes osteoarthritis of the hip: a nationwide prospective cohort study (CHECK). Ann Rheum Dis 2013; 72 (06) 918-923
• 19 Tannast M, Siebenrock KA, Anderson SE. Femoroacetabular impingement: radiographic diagnosis—what the radiologist should know. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188 (06) 1540-1552
• 20 Tannast M, Fritsch S, Zheng G, Siebenrock KA, Steppacher SD. Which radiographic hip parameters do not have to be corrected for pelvic rotation and tilt?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (04) 1255-1266
• 21 Jackson TJ, Estess AA, Adamson GJ. Supine and standing AP pelvis radiographs in the evaluation of pincer femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474 (07) 1692-1696
• 22 Wassilew GI, Heller MO, Janz V, Perka C, Müller M, Renner L. High prevalence of acetabular retroversion in asymptomatic adults: a 3D CT-based study. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B (12) 1584-1589
• 23 Zaltz I, Kelly BT, Hetsroni I, Bedi A. The crossover sign overestimates acetabular retroversion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (08) 2463-2470
• 24 Ayeni OR, Karlsson J, Philippon MJ, Safran MR. Diagnosis and Management of Femoroacetabular Impingement. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016
• 25 Meyer DC, Beck M, Ellis T, Ganz R, Leunig M. Comparison of six radiographic projections to assess femoral head/neck asphericity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 445: 181-185
• 26 Lim S-J, Park Y-S. Plain radiography of the hip: a review of radiographic techniques and image features. Hip Pelvis 2015; 27 (03) 125-134
• 27 Mascarenhas VV, Rego P, Dantas P, Gaspar A, Soldado F, Consciência JG. Cam deformity and the omega angle, a novel quantitative measurement of femoral head-neck morphology: a 3D CT gender analysis in asymptomatic subjects. Eur Radiol 2017; 27 (05) 2011-2023
• 28 Domayer SE, Ziebarth K, Chan J, Bixby S, Mamisch TC, Kim YJ. Femoroacetabular cam-type impingement: diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of radiographic views compared to radial MRI. Eur J Radiol 2011; 80 (03) 805-810
• 29 Saito M, Tsukada S, Yoshida K, Okada Y, Tasaki A. Correlation of alpha angle between various radiographic projections and radial magnetic resonance imaging for cam deformity in femoral head–neck junction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (01) 77-83
• 30 Hipfl C, Titz M, Chiari C. , et al. Detecting cam-type deformities on plain radiographs: what is the optimal lateral view?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137 (12) 1699-1705
• 31 Dunn DM. Anteversion of the neck of the femur; a method of measurement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1952; 34-B [phone]
• 32 Lee CB, Spencer HT. Comparison of intraoperative fluoroscopic Dunn view with magnetic resonance imaging to determine femoral version. Arthroscopy 2017; 33 (06) 1186-1193
• 33 Mascarenhas VV, Caetano A. Imaging the young adult hip in the future. Ann Joint 2018; 3: 47
• 34 Heyworth BE, Dolan MM, Nguyen JT, Chen NC, Kelly BT. Preoperative three-dimensional CT predicts intraoperative findings in hip arthroscopy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (07) 1950-1957
• 35 Dandachli W, Najefi A, Iranpour F, Lenihan J, Hart A, Cobb J. Quantifying the contribution of pincer deformity to femoro-acetabular impingement using 3D computerised tomography. Skeletal Radiol 2012; 41 (10) 1295-1300
• 36 de Sa D, Horner NS, MacDonald A. , et al. Evaluating healthcare resource utilization and outcomes for surgical hip dislocation and hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (12) 3943-3954
• 37 Mettler Jr FA, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 2008; 248 (01) 254-263
• 38 Hendee WR, O'Connor MK. Radiation risks of medical imaging: separating fact from fantasy. Radiology 2012; 264 (02) 312-321
• 39 Samim M, Eftekhary N, Vigdorchik JM. , et al. 3D-MRI versus 3D-CT in the evaluation of osseous anatomy in femoroacetabular impingement using Dixon 3D FLASH sequence. Skeletal Radiol 2019; 48 (03) 429-436
• 40 Yan K, Xi Y, Sasiponganan C, Zerr J, Wells JE, Chhabra A. Does 3DMR provide equivalent information as 3DCT for the pre-operative evaluation of adult hip pain conditions of femoroacetabular impingement and hip dysplasia?. Br J Radiol 2018; 91 (1092): 20180474
• 41 Lopes DS, Pires SM, Mascarenhas VV, Silva MT, Jorge JA. On a “Columbus' Egg”: modeling the shape of asymptomatic, dysplastic and impinged hip joints. Med Eng Phys 2018; 59 (July): 50-55
• 42 Stelzeneder D, Hingsammer A, Bixby SD, Kim Y-J. Can radiographic morphometric parameters for the hip be assessed on MRI?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (03) 989-999
• 43 Fowkes LA, Petridou E, Zagorski C, Karuppiah A, Toms AP. Defining a reference range of acetabular inclination and center-edge angle of the hip in asymptomatic individuals. Skeletal Radiol 2011; 40 (11) 1427-1434
• 44 Chadayammuri V, Garabekyan T, Jesse M-K. , et al. Measurement of lateral acetabular coverage: a comparison between CT and plain radiography. J Hip Preserv Surg 2015; 2 (04) 392-400
• 45 Harris-Hayes M, Commean PK, Patterson JD, Clohisy JC, Hillen TJ. Bony abnormalities of the hip joint: a new comprehensive, reliable and radiation-free measurement method using magnetic resonance imaging. J Hip Preserv Surg 2014; 1 (02) 62-70
• 46 Air ME, Harrison JR, Nguyen JT, Kelly BT, Bogner EA, Moley PJ. Correlation of measurements of the prearthritic hip between plain radiography and computed tomography. PM R 2019; 11 (02) 158-166
• 47 Mantovani G, Ng KCG, Lamontagne M. Regression models to predict hip joint centers in pathological hip population. Gait Posture 2016; 44: 48-54
• 48 Tannast M, Hanke MS, Zheng G, Steppacher SD, Siebenrock KA. What are the radiographic reference values for acetabular under- and overcoverage?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (04) 1234-1246
• 49 Boyd JC. Defining laboratory reference values and decision limits: populations, intervals, and interpretations. Asian J Androl 2010; 12 (01) 83-90
• 50 Obuchowski NA, Subhas N, Polster J. Statistics for radiology research. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2017; 21 (01) 23-31
• 51 Mascarenhas VV, Rego P, Dantas P. , et al. Hip shape is symmetric, non-dependent on limb dominance and gender-specific: implications for femoroacetabular impingement. A 3D CT analysis in asymptomatic subjects. Eur Radiol 2018; 28 (04) 1609-1624
• 52 Gollwitzer H, Suren C, Strüwind C. , et al. The natural alpha angle of the femoral head-neck junction: a cross-sectional CT study in 1312 femurs. Bone Joint J 2018; 100-B [phone]
• 53 Mascarenhas VV, Rego P, Dantas P. , et al. Can we discriminate symptomatic hip patients from asymptomatic volunteers based on anatomic predictors? A 3-dimensional magnetic resonance study on cam, pincer, and spinopelvic parameters. Am J Sports Med 2018; 46 (13) 3097-3110
• 54 Ng KC, Mantovani G, Lamontagne M, Labrosse MR, Beaulé PE. Increased hip stresses resulting from a cam deformity and decreased femoral neck-shaft angle during level walking. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017; 475 (04) 998-1008
• 55 Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CWA. How useful is the alpha angle for discriminating between symptomatic patients with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement and asymptomatic volunteers?. Radiology 2012; 264 (02) 514-521
• 56 Wiberg G. Studies on dysplastic acetabula and congenital subluxation of the hip joint. With special reference to the complication of osteoarthritis. Acta Chir Scand 1939; 83 (Suppl 58): 28-38
• 57 Werner CML, Ramseier LE, Ruckstuhl T. , et al. Normal values of Wiberg's lateral center-edge angle and Lequesne's acetabular index—a coxometric update. Skeletal Radiol 2012; 41 (10) 1273-1278
• 58 Fischer CS, Kühn J-P, Ittermann T. , et al. What are the reference values and associated factors for center-edge angle and alpha angle? A population-based study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018; 476 (11) 2249-2259
• 59 Ogata S, Moriya H, Tsuchiya K, Akita T, Kamegaya M, Someya M. Acetabular cover in congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1990; 72 (02) 190-196
• 60 Egund N. Comment on Mittal et al: Defining the lateral edge of the femoroacetabular articulation: correlation analysis between radiographs and computed tomography. J Child Orthop 2017; 11 (03) 240-241
• 61 Wylie JD, Kapron AL, Peters CL, Aoki SK, Maak TG. Relationship between the lateral center-edge angle and 3-dimensional acetabular coverage. Orthop J Sports Med 2017; 5 (04) 2325967117700589
• 62 Mittal A, Bomar JD, Jeffords ME, Huang M-T, Wenger DR, Upasani VV. Defining the lateral edge of the femoroacetabular articulation: correlation analysis between radiographs and computed tomography. J Child Orthop 2016; 10 (05) 365-370
• 63 Tönnis D, Heinecke A. Acetabular and femoral anteversion: relationship with osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999; 81 (12) 1747-1770
• 64 Zingg PO, Werner CML, Sukthankar A, Zanetti M, Seifert B, Dora C. The anterior center edge angle in Lequesne's false profile view: interrater correlation, dependence on pelvic tilt and correlation to anterior acetabular coverage in the sagittal plane. A cadaver study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009; 129 (06) 787-791
• 65 Kalberer F, Sierra RJ, Madan SS, Ganz R, Leunig M. Ischial spine projection into the pelvis : a new sign for acetabular retroversion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466 (03) 677-683
• 66 Siebenrock KA, Kistler L, Schwab JM, Büchler L, Tannast M. The acetabular wall index for assessing anteroposterior femoral head coverage in symptomatic patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (12) 3355-3360
• 67 Laborie LB, Lehmann TG, Engesæter IO, Eastwood DM, Engesæter LB, Rosendahl K. Prevalence of radiographic findings thought to be associated with femoroacetabular impingement in a population-based cohort of 2081 healthy young adults. Radiology 2011; 260 (02) 494-502
• 68 Werner CM, Copeland CE, Stromberg J, Ruckstuhl T. Correlation of the cross-over ratio of the cross-over sign on conventional pelvic radiographs with computed tomography retroversion measurements. Skeletal Radiol 2010; 39 (07) 655-660
• 69 Kappe T, Kocak T, Neuerburg C, Lippacher S, Bieger R, Reichel H. Reliability of radiographic signs for acetabular retroversion. Int Orthop 2011; 35 (06) 817-821
• 70 Ross JR, Tannenbaum EP, Nepple JJ, Kelly BT, Larson CM, Bedi A. Functional acetabular orientation varies between supine and standing radiographs: implications for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (04) 1267-1273
• 71 Anda S, Terjesen T, Kvistad KA, Svenningsen S. Acetabular angles and femoral anteversion in dysplastic hips in adults: CT investigation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991; 15 (01) 115-120
• 72 Chadayammuri V, Garabekyan T, Jesse M-K. , et al. Measurement of lateral acetabular coverage: a comparison between CT and plain radiography. J Hip Preserv Surg 2015; 2 (04) 392-400
• 73 Murphy SB, Kijewski PK, Millis MB, Harless A. Acetabular dysplasia in the adolescent and young adult. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990; (261) 214-223
• 74 Grammatopoulos G, Speirs AD, Ng KCG. , et al. Acetabular and spino-pelvic morphologies are different in subjects with symptomatic cam femoro-acetabular impingement. J Orthop Res 2018; 36 (07) 1840-1848
• 75 Anda S, Svenningsen S, Dale LG, Benum P. The acetabular sector angle of the adult hip determined by computed tomography. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 1986; 27 (04) 443-447
• 76 Visser JD, Jonkers A, Hillen B. Hip joint measurements with computerized tomography. J Pediatr Orthop 1982; 2 (02) 143-146
• 77 Reikerås O, Bjerkreim I, Kolbenstvedt A. Anteversion of the acetabulum and femoral neck in normals and in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip. Acta Orthop Scand 1983; 54 (01) 18-23
• 78 Jamali AA, Mladenov K, Meyer DC. , et al. Anteroposterior pelvic radiographs to assess acetabular retroversion: high validity of the “cross-over-sign.”. J Orthop Res 2007; 25 (06) 758-765
• 79 Laborie LB, Engesæter IØ, Lehmann TG. , et al. Radiographic measurements of hip dysplasia at skeletal maturity—new reference intervals based on 2,038 19-year-old Norwegians. Skeletal Radiol 2013; 42 (07) 925-935
• 80 Engesæter IO, Laborie LB, Lehmann TG. , et al. Prevalence of radiographic findings associated with hip dysplasia in a population-based cohort of 2081 19-year-old Norwegians. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B [phone]
• 81 Wells J, Nepple JJ, Crook K. , et al. Femoral morphology in the dysplastic hip: three-dimensional characterizations with CT. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017; 475 (04) 1045-1054
• 82 Dandachli W, Ul Islam S, Tippett R, Hall-Craggs MA, Witt JD. Analysis of acetabular version in the native hip: comparison between 2D axial CT and 3D CT measurements. Skeletal Radiol 2011; 40 (07) 877-883
• 83 Stem ES, O'Connor MI, Kransdorf MJ, Crook J. Computed tomography analysis of acetabular anteversion and abduction. Skeletal Radiol 2006; 35 (06) 385-389
• 84 Kang ACL, Gooding AJ, Coates MH, Goh TD, Armour P, Rietveld J. Computed tomography assessment of hip joints in asymptomatic individuals in relation to femoroacetabular impingement. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38 (06) 1160-1165
• 85 Larson CM, Moreau-Gaudry A, Kelly BT. , et al. Are normal hips being labeled as pathologic? A CT-based method for defining normal acetabular coverage. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (04) 1247-1254
• 86 Nötzli HP, Wyss TF, Stoecklin CH, Schmid MR, Treiber K, Hodler J. The contour of the femoral head-neck junction as a predictor for the risk of anterior impingement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002; 84 (04) 556-560
• 87 Bouma H, Slot N-J, Toogood P, Pollard T, van Kampen P, Hogervorst T. Where is the neck? Alpha angle measurement revisited. Acta Orthop 2014; 85 (02) 147-151
• 88 Lohan DG, Seeger LL, Motamedi K, Hame S, Sayre J. Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer?. Skeletal Radiol 2009; 38 (09) 855-862
• 89 Barton C, Salineros MJ, Rakhra KS, Beaulé PE. Validity of the alpha angle measurement on plain radiographs in the evaluation of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (02) 464-469
• 90 Yanke AB, Khair MM, Stanley R. , et al. Sex differences in patients with CAM deformities with femoroacetabular impingement: 3-dimensional computed tomographic quantification. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (12) 2301-2306
• 91 Frank JM, Harris JD, Erickson BJ. , et al. Prevalence of femoroacetabular impingement imaging findings in asymptomatic volunteers: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (06) 1199-1204
• 92 Hack K, Di Primio G, Rakhra K, Beaulé PE. Prevalence of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement morphology in asymptomatic volunteers. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92 (14) 2436-2444
• 93 Golfam M, Di Primio LA, Beaulé PE, Hack K, Schweitzer ME. Alpha angle measurements in healthy adult volunteers vary depending on the MRI plane acquisition used. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (03) 620-626
• 94 Reichenbach S, Jüni P, Werlen S. , et al. Prevalence of cam-type deformity on hip magnetic resonance imaging in young males: a cross-sectional study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2010; 62 (09) 1319-1327
• 95 Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M, Leunig M, Nötzli H, Siebenrock KA. Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003; (417) 112-120
• 96 Ganz R, Gill TJ, Gautier E, Ganz K, Krügel N, Berlemann U. Surgical dislocation of the adult hip a technique with full access to the femoral head and acetabulum without the risk of avascular necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83 (08) 1119-1124
• 97 Agricola R, Waarsing JH, Thomas GE. , et al. Cam impingement: defining the presence of a cam deformity by the alpha angle: data from the CHECK cohort and Chingford cohort. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2014; 22 (02) 218-225
• 98 Fraitzl CR, Kappe T, Pennekamp F, Reichel H, Billich C. Femoral head-neck offset measurements in 339 subjects: distribution and implications for femoroacetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (05) 1212-1217
• 99 Ito K, Minka II MA, Leunig M, Werlen S, Ganz R. Femoroacetabular impingement and the cam-effect. An MRI-based quantitative anatomical study of the femoral head-neck offset. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83 (02) 171-176
• 100 Eijer H, Leunig M, Mahomed MN, Ganz R. Cross-table lateral radiographs for screening of anterior femoral head-neck offset in patients with femoro-acetabular impingement. Hip 2001; 11 (01) 37-41
• 101 Beaulé PE, Harvey N, Zaragoza E, Le Duff MJ, Dorey FJ. The femoral head/neck offset and hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89 (01) 9-15
• 102 Pollard TCB, Villar RN, Norton MR. , et al. Femoroacetabular impingement and classification of the cam deformity: the reference interval in normal hips. Acta Orthop 2010; 81 (01) 134-141
• 103 Ehrmann C, Rosskopf AB, Pfirrmann CWA, Sutter R. Beyond the alpha angle: Alternative measurements for quantifying cam-type deformities in femoroacetabular impingement. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015; 42 (04) 1024-1031
• 104 Bobroff ED, Chambers HG, Sartoris DJ, Wyatt MP, Sutherland DH. Femoral anteversion and neck-shaft angle in children with cerebral palsy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999; (364) 194-204
• 105 Ng KCG, Lamontagne M, Labrosse MR, Beaulé PE. Hip joint stresses due to cam-type femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review of finite element simulations. PLoS ONE 2016; 11 (01) e0147813
• 106 Guevara CJ, Pietrobon R, Carothers JT, Olson SA, Vail TP. Comprehensive morphologic evaluation of the hip in patients with symptomatic labral tear. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 453 (453) 277-285
• 107 Boese CK, Dargel J, Oppermann J. , et al. The femoral neck-shaft angle on plain radiographs: a systematic review. Skeletal Radiol 2016; 45 (01) 19-28
• 108 Boese CK, Jostmeier J, Oppermann J. , et al. The neck shaft angle: CT reference values of 800 adult hips. Skeletal Radiol 2016; 45 (04) 455-463 . Doi: 10.1007/s00256-015-2314-2
• 109 Gosvig KK, Jacobsen S, Palm H, Sonne-Holm S, Magnusson E. A new radiological index for assessing asphericity of the femoral head in cam impingement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89 (10) 1309-1316
• 110 Rego PRA, Mascarenhas V, Oliveira FS. , et al. Morphologic and angular planning for cam resection in femoro-acetabular impingement: value of the omega angle. Int Orthop 2016; 40 (10) 2011-2017
• 111 Rego P, Mascarenhas V, Collado D, Coelho A, Barbosa L, Ganz R. Arterial topographic anatomy near the femoral head-neck perforation with surgical relevance. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (14) 1213-1221
• 112 Murphy SB, Simon SR, Kijewski PK, Wilkinson RH, Griscom NT. Femoral anteversion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987; 69 (08) 1169-1176
• 113 Gelberman RH, Cohen MS, Desai SS, Griffin PP, Salamon PB, O'Brien TM. Femoral anteversion. A clinical assessment of idiopathic intoeing gait in children. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1987; 69 (01) 75-79
• 114 Tönnis D, Heinecke A. Diminished femoral antetorsion syndrome: a cause of pain and osteoarthritis. J Pediatr Orthop 1991; 11 (04) 419-431
• 115 Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CWA. Femoral antetorsion: comparing asymptomatic volunteers and patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Radiology 2012; 263 (02) 475-483
• 116 Gómez-Hoyos J, Schröder R, Reddy M, Palmer IJ, Martin HD. Femoral neck anteversion and lesser trochanteric retroversion in patients with ischiofemoral impingement: a case-control magnetic resonance imaging study. Arthroscopy 2016; 32 (01) 13-18
• 117 Botser IB, Ozoude GC, Martin DE, Siddiqi AJ, Kuppuswami S, Domb BG. Femoral anteversion in the hip: comparison of measurement by computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and physical examination. Arthroscopy 2012; 28 (05) 619-627
• 118 Kelly BT, Bedi A, Robertson CM, Dela Torre K, Giveans MR, Larson CM. Alterations in internal rotation and alpha angles are associated with arthroscopic cam decompression in the hip. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40 (05) 1107-1112
• 119 Kraeutler MJ, Chadayammuri V, Garabekyan T, Mei-Dan O. Femoral version abnormalities significantly outweigh effect of cam impingement on hip internal rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2018; 100 (03) 205-210
• 120 Lerch TD, Todorski IAS, Steppacher SD. , et al. Prevalence of femoral and acetabular version abnormalities in patients with symptomatic hip disease: a controlled study of 538 hips. Am J Sports Med 2018; 46 (01) 122-134
• 121 Tibor LM, Liebert G, Sutter R, Impellizzeri FM, Leunig M. Two or more impingement and/or instability deformities are often present in patients with hip pain. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (12) 3762-3773
• 122 Fritz B, Bensler S, Leunig M, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CWA, Sutter R. MRI Assessment of supra- and infratrochanteric femoral torsion: association with femoroacetabular impingement and hip dysplasia. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 211 (01) 155-161
• 123 McCarthy JC, Noble PC, Villar RN. Hip Joint Restoration. New York, NY: Springer; 2016
• 124 Fuller CB, Farnsworth CL, Bomar JD. , et al. Femoral version: comparison among advanced imaging methods. J Orthop Res 2018; 36 (05) 1536-1542
• 125 Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CWA. Assessment of femoral antetorsion with MRI: comparison of oblique measurements to standard transverse measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205 (01) 130-135
• 126 Hartel MJ, Petersik A, Schmidt A. , et al. Determination of femoral neck angle and torsion angle utilizing a novel three-dimensional modeling and analytical technology based on CT datasets. PLoS ONE 2016; 11 (03) e0149480
• 127 Kaiser P, Attal R, Kammerer M. , et al. Significant differences in femoral torsion values depending on the CT measurement technique. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2016; 136 (09) 1259-1264
• 128 Schneider B, Laubenberger J, Jemlich S, Groene K, Weber HM, Langer M. Measurement of femoral antetorsion and tibial torsion by magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Radiol 1997; 70 (834) 575-579
• 129 Tomczak RJ, Guenther KP, Rieber A, Mergo P, Ros PR, Brambs HJ. MR imaging measurement of the femoral antetorsional angle as a new technique: comparison with CT in children and adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168 (03) 791-794
• 130 Berryman F, Pynsent P, McBryde C. A semi-automated method for measuring femoral shape to derive version and its comparison with existing methods. Int J Numer Methods Biomed Eng 2014; 30 (11) 1314-1325
• 131 Tardieu C, Hasegawa K, Haeusler M. How did the pelvis and vertebral column become a functional unit during the transition from occasional to permanent bipedalism?. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2017; 300 (05) 912-931
• 132 Duval-Beaupère G, Schmidt C, Cosson P. A Barycentremetric study of the sagittal shape of spine and pelvis: the conditions required for an economic standing position. Ann Biomed Eng 1992; 20 (04) 451-462
• 133 Legaye J, Duval-Beaupère G, Hecquet J, Marty C. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J 1998; 7 (02) 99-103
• 134 Zhu Z, Xu L, Zhu F. , et al. Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis in asymptomatic adults: norms in Chinese populations. Spine 2014; 39 (01) E1-E6
• 135 Weinberg DS, Liu RW, Xie KK, Morris WZ, Gebhart JJ, Gordon ZL. Increased and decreased pelvic incidence, sagittal facet joint orientations are associated with lumbar spine osteoarthritis in a large cadaveric collection. International Orthopaedics 2017; 41 (08) 1593-1600
• 136 Gebhart JJ, Weinberg DS, Bohl MS, Liu RW. Relationship between pelvic incidence and osteoarthritis of the hip. Bone Joint Res 2016; 5 (02) 66-72
• 137 Ng KCG, Lamontagne M, Jeffers JRT, Grammatopoulos G, Beaulé PE. Anatomic predictors of sagittal hip and pelvic motions in patients with a cam deformity. Am J Sports Med 2018; 46 (06) 1331-1342
• 138 Chen H-F, Zhao C-Q. Pelvic incidence variation among individuals: functional influence versus genetic determinism. J Orthop Surg Res 2018; 13 (01) 59
• 139 Moon JW, Shinn JK, Ryu D, Oh S-Y, Shim YS, Yoon SH. Pelvic incidence can be changed not only by age and sex, but also by posture used during imaging. Korean J Spine 2017; 14 (03) 77-83
• 140 Endo K, Suzuki H, Nishimura H, Tanaka H, Shishido T, Yamamoto K. Sagittal lumbar and pelvic alignment in the standing and sitting positions. J Orthop Sci 2012; 17 (06) 682-686
• 141 Ozkunt O, Sariyilmaz K, Gemalmaz HC, Kaya O, Dikici F. Comparison of spinal sagittal parameters by time of day in a healthy working population: Do we bend during the day?. J Back Musculoskeletal Rehabil 2018; 31 (02) 381-388
• 142 Park S-A, Kwak D-S, Cho H-J, Min D-U. Changes of spinopelvic parameters in different positions. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137 (09) 1223-1232
• 143 Lee CS, Chung SS, Kang KC, Park SJ, Shin SK. Normal patterns of sagittal alignment of the spine in young adults radiological analysis in a Korean population. Spine 2011; 36 (25) E1648-E1654
• 144 Mac-Thiong J-M, Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Guigui P. Age- and sex-related variations in sagittal sacropelvic morphology and balance in asymptomatic adults. Eur Spine J 2011; 20 (Suppl. 05) 572-577
• 145 Sudhir G, Acharya S, K L K, Chahal R. Radiographic analysis of the sacropelvic parameters of the spine and their correlation in normal asymptomatic subjects. Global Spine J 2016; 6 (02) 169-175
• 146 Asai Y, Tsutsui S, Oka H. , et al. Sagittal spino-pelvic alignment in adults: the Wakayama spine study. PLoS ONE 2017; 12 (06) e0178697
• 147 Sohn S, Chung CK, Kim YJ. , et al. Sagittal spinal alignment in asymptomatic patients over 30 years old in the Korean population. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2017; 159 (06) 1119-1128
• 148 Le Huec JC, Hasegawa K. Normative values for the spine shape parameters using 3D standing analysis from a database of 268 asymptomatic Caucasian and Japanese subjects. Eur Spine J 2016; 25 (11) 3630-3637
• 149 Romero-Vargas S, Zárate-Kalfópulos B, Otero-Cámara E. , et al. The impact of body mass index and central obesity on the spino-pelvic parameters: a correlation study. Eur Spine J 2013; 22 (04) 878-882
• 150 Roussouly P, Pinheiro-Franco JL. Biomechanical analysis of the spino-pelvic organization and adaptation in pathology. Eur Spine J 2011; 20 (Suppl. 05) 609-618
• 151 Saltychev M, Pernaa K, Seppänen M, Mäkelä K, Laimi K. Pelvic incidence and hip disorders. Acta Orthop 2018; 89 (01) 66-70
• 152 Tiziani S, Gautier L, Farei-Campagna J. , et al. Correlation of pelvic incidence with radiographical parameters for acetabular retroversion: a retrospective radiological study. BMC Med Imaging 2015; 15 (September): 39
• 153 Pierannunzii L. Pelvic posture and kinematics in femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. J Orthop Traumatol 2017; 18 (03) 187-196
• 154 Palmer A, Fernquest S, Rombach I. , et al. Diagnostic and prognostic value of delayed Gadolinium Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Cartilage (dGEMRIC) in early osteoarthritis of the hip. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2017; 25 (09) 1468-1477
• 155 Bittersohl B, Hosalkar HS, Apprich S, Werlen SA, Siebenrock KA, Mamisch TC. Comparison of pre-operative dGEMRIC imaging with intra-operative findings in femoroacetabular impingement: preliminary findings. Skeletal Radiol 2011; 40 (05) 553-561