"Anterior-shift sign": a novel MRI finding of adult hip dysplasia

Imaging characteristics of hip joint microinstability: a case-control study of hip arthroscopy patients

OBJECTIVES

Hip microinstability is a clinical entity increasingly recognized and treated but challenging to diagnose with a lack of objective criteria. This study assessed the prevalence and diagnostic accuracy of different imaging findings for hip microinstability on radiograph and MR.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study of 224 hips treated with arthroscopic surgery by a single orthopedic surgeon, 112 hips with clinical microinstability and 112 controls without. Pre-operative radiograph and MRI/MRA imaging were evaluated by two musculoskeletal radiologists to assess morphological parameters and imaging signs reportedly associated with hip microinstability.

RESULTS

Four imaging features reached significance as predictors of microinstability via three-step logistic regression: labral hyperplasia and decreased lateral center edge angle on MR (OR 2.45 and 0.93, respectively) and the absence of positive ischial spine sign and absence of osteophytes on radiographs (OR 0.47 and 0.28, respectively). Increased acetabular anteversion and absence of cam lesions were more likely in the microinstability group (p = 0.02 and 0.04, respectively), but not independent predictors. Labral tears, chondral loss, abnormal ligamentum teres, anterior capsule thinning, iliocapsularis to rectus femoris ratio, posterior crescent sign, cliff sign, and femoro-epiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index were not associated with microinstabillity.

CONCLUSION

Imaging features may be predictive of hip microinstability in some cases. Decreased LCEA, increased acetabular anteversion, and labral hyperplasia were associated with microinstability in this study, while many other published imaging findings were not. Imaging remains complementary, but not definitive, in the diagnosis of hip microinstability.

Femoral head decentration on hip MRI: comparison between imaging planes, methods of contrast administration, and hip deformities

OBJECTIVES

To compare the prevalence of femoral head decentration (FHD) on different MR imaging planes in patients undergoing direct/indirect hip MR arthrography (MRA) with asymptomatic controls and to evaluate its association with osseous deformities.

METHODS

IRB-approved retrospective single-center study of symptomatic hips undergoing direct or indirect hip MRA at 3 T. Asymptomatic participants underwent non-contrast hip MRI at 3 T. FHD was defined as a continuous fluid layer between the acetabulum and femoral head and assessed on axial, sagittal and radial images. The association of intra-articular/intra-venous contrast agents and the prevalence of FHD was evaluated. The association of FHD with osseous deformities and joint damage was assessed using multiple logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Three-hundred ninety-four patients (447 hips, mean age 31 ± 9 years, 247 females) were included and compared to 43 asymptomatic controls (43 hips, mean age 31 ± 6 years, 26 females). FHD was most prevalent on radial images and more frequent in symptomatic hips (30% versus 2%, p < 0.001). FHD prevalence was not associated with the presence/absence of intra-articular contrast agents (30% versus 22%, OR = 1.5 (95% CI 0.9-2.5), p = 0.125). FHD was associated with hip dysplasia (OR = 6.1 (3.3-11.1), p < 0.001), excessive femoral torsion (OR = 3.0 (1.3-6.8), p = 0.010), and severe cartilage damage (OR = 3.6 (2.0-6.7), p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

While rare in asymptomatic patients, femoral head decentration in symptomatic patients is associated with osseous deformities predisposing to hip instability, as well as with extensive cartilage damage.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Decentration of the femoral head on radial MRA may be interpreted as a sign of hip instability in symptomatic hips without extensive cartilage defects. Its presence could unmask hip instability and yield promise in surgical decision-making.

KEY POINTS

The best method of identifying femoral head decentration is radial MRI. The presence/absence of intra-articular contrast is not associated with femoral head decentration. Femoral head decentration is associated with hip deformities predisposing to hip instability.

Biomechanical analysis of load distribution in porcine hip joints at different acetabular coverages

BACKGROUND

Developmental dysplasia of the hip causes secondary osteoarthritis. Finite element analysis suggests high hip joint contact pressure in patients with hip dysplasia and a reduction in contact pressure after periacetabular osteotomy. However, few biomechanical studies have examined the load distribution in the hip joint. This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical properties of load distribution in porcine hip joints at different acetabular coverages.

METHODS

Six porcine hip joints were analyzed using three models: 1) neutral coverage, 2) 15° under-coverage (defined as dysplasia model), and 3) 15° over-coverage created by varying the acetabular coverage. The load distribution was assessed using a pressure-mapping sensor system after applying a loading force of 100 N to the hip joint.

RESULTS

In the dysplasia model, the load was concentrated at the acetabular rim; in the neutral and over-coverage models, it was dispersed. The average contact pressure was significantly higher in the dysplasia model than in the neutral coverage model ([0.42 vs. 0.3 MPa]; p = 0.004). The contact area was significantly smaller in the dysplasia model than in the neutral coverage model ([250.7 vs. 345.0 mm2]; p = 0.004). No significant differences were observed in contact pressure or area between the neutral and over-coverage models.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient acetabular coverage in the dysplasia model demonstrated higher contact pressure and smaller contact area than the neutral model. Conversely, the contact pressure and area in the over-coverage model did not differ significantly from those in the normal model. Therefore, surgeons should note that acetabular coverage overcorrection has limited effect; normalization is crucial during periacetabular osteotomy.

The posterior crescent sign on MRI and MR arthrography: is it a marker of hip dysplasia and instability?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of the 'posterior crescent sign' in symptomatic patients referred for MRI/MR arthrogram of the hip and identify any correlation with imaging features of joint pathology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective imaging assessment of a cohort of 1462 hips, from 1380 included MR examinations (82 bilateral) retrieved from a search of all examinations in patients 16-50 years old from June 2018 to June 2021, with median age 45.8 years (range 17.8-50.0) and 936 hips (64%) in women. Radiographic and MR findings related to hip dysplasia, femoroacetabular impingement and osteoarthritis were assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty-one hips (3.5%) were positive for the posterior crescent sign, median age of 45.8 years (range 17.8-50.0) and 29 (58%) in women. Radiographic findings included the following: mean lateral centre edge angle (LCEA) 22.2° (± 7.8°) with LCEA < 20° in 15 (31%) and LCEA 20-25° in 17 (35%) and mean acetabular index (AI) of 13.1° (± 5.8°) with AI > 13° in 22 (45%). MR findings included the following: mean anterior acetabular sector angle (AASA) 54.3° (± 9.8°), mean posterior acetabular sector angle (PASA) 92.7° (± 7.0°), labral tear at 3-4 o'clock in 20 (39%), high-grade acetabular chondral loss in 42 (83%) and ligamentum teres abnormality in 20 (39%).

CONCLUSION

The posterior crescent sign occurs in 3.5% of symptomatic young and middle-aged adults on MR. It is associated with overt and borderline hip dysplasia and other findings of hip instability. It is also associated with osteoarthritis in some cases and should be interpreted with caution in these patients.