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

OBJECTIVE: To determine the reference intervals (RefInt) of the quantitative morphometric parameters of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in asymptomatic hips with computed tomography (CT) and determine their dependence on age, side, limb dominance and sex. METHODS: We prospectively included 590 patients and evaluated 1111 hips with semi-automated CT analysis. We calculated overall, side- and sex-specific parameters for imaging signs of cam [omega and alpha angle (α°)] and pincer-type morphology [acetabular version (ACvers), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) and cranio-caudal coverage]. RESULTS: Hip shape was symmetrical and did not depend on limb dominance. The 95% RefInt limits were sex-different for all cam-type parameters and extended beyond current abnormal thresholds. Specifically, the upper limits of RefInt for α° at 12:00, 1:30 and 3:00 o'clock positions were 56°, 70° and 58°, respectively, and 45° for LCEA. Acetabular morphology varied between age groups, with a trend toward an LCEA/ACvers increase over time. CONCLUSION: Our morphometric measurements can be used to estimate normal hip morphology in asymptomatic individuals. Notably they extended beyond current thresholds used for FAI imaging diagnosis, which was most pronounced for cam-type parameters. We suggest the need to reassess α° RefInt and consider a 60° threshold for the 12:00/3:00 positions and 65-70° for other antero-superior positions. KEY POINTS: • Hip shape is symmetrical regardless of limb dominance. • Pincer/cam morphology is frequent in asymptomatic subjects (20 and 71%, respectively). • LCEA and acetabular version increases with age (5-7° between opposite age groups). • Femoral morphology is stable after physeal closure (in the absence of pathology). • Alpha and omega angle thresholds should be set according to sex.

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

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.

Imaging prevalence of femoroacetabular impingement in symptomatic patients, athletes, and asymptomatic individuals: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is a wide discrepancy in reported prevalence rates for cam, pincer, and mixed femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), particularly among distinct populations, namely asymptomatic or symptomatic subjects and athletes. No systematic analysis to date has yet compared studies among these groups to determine differences in radiographic signs of FAI. METHODS: A systematic review of existing literature was performed to determine the prevalence of radiographic signs of FAI among athletes, asymptomatic subjects, and symptomatic patients. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were applied to systematically search PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. RESULTS: We identified 361 studies in our literature search. After considering the exclusion criteria, 60 were included in this systematic review: 15 in athletes, 10 in purely asymptomatic patients, and 35 in symptomatic, non-athlete populations. Cam impingement was significantly (p=0.0003) more common in athletes versus asymptomatic subjects but not compared to symptomatic patients (p=0.107). In addition, cam FAI was significantly more common in symptomatic versus asymptomatic cases (p=0.009). The percentage of patients with cam-type FAI showed significant differences across groups (p=0.006). No significant differences were found between pincer-type FAI morphology prevalence when comparing athletes to symptomatic patients. However, mixed-type FAI was significantly more common in athletes versus asymptomatic subjects (p=0.03) and in asymptomatic versus symptomatic subjects (p=0.015). The percentage of patients with mixed-type FAI showed significant differences across groups (p=0.041). The mean alpha angle was significantly greater in the symptomatic group versus either the asymptomatic or athlete group (p<0.001). Significant differences in mean alpha angles were noted across groups (p=0.0000). CONCLUSIONS: Imaging suspicion of FAI is common among athletes, asymptomatic, and symptomatic populations. However, significant differences in type and imaging signs of FAI exist among these groups that need to be considered in patients' decision making.