Spinopelvic Parameters Do Not Influence Outcomes Following Primary Hip Arthroscopy for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Effect of lumbosacral transitional vertebra on developmental alterations of the hip: a quantitative investigation of the lumbo-pelvic-hip complex via whole-body computed tomography

Background

Lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV) is a common spinal variant, with the reported prevalence varying from 8.1% to 36%. LSTV has been shown to alter the lumbo-pelvic parameters and reduce the benefits of total hip arthroplasty, but the specific effects of LSTV on hip development remain unclear. The aim of this study was thus to investigate the impact of LSTV on developmental alterations of the hip.

Methods

A total of 310 individuals were categorized into three groups according to whole-body computed tomography (CT) imaging: a group with sacralization of 23 presacral vertebrae (PSV) (n=102), a group with lumbarization of 25 PSV (n=108), and a normal control group with 24 PSV (n=100). Quantitative parameters of the lumbo-pelvic-hip complex (LPHC) including lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), axial and sagittal acetabular anteversion angle (AAA), center-edge (CE) angle, Sharp angle, and femoral neck-shaft angle (FNSA) were measured and analyzed. Statistical analyses were used to compare the differences of these quantitative parameters among the three groups and to assess the relationship between hip and lumbar-pelvic parameters.

Results

Significant differences between each pair of three groups and the LSTV subgroups were only found in the sagittal AAA (left side: P=0.008; right side: P<0.001), with no differences found for the other parameters. Compared to the normal group (24 PSV), both the 23 PSV and 25 PSV groups exhibited increased values in the sagittal AAA, especially in the right side of the 23 PSV group. Only the sagittal AAA showed low-to-moderate positive correlations with pelvic parameters of PI (r=0.195-0.429; P=0.001-0.08) and PT (r=0.239-0.605; P=0.001-0.03).

Conclusions

Variations of LSTV are correlated with the hip anatomical development via LPHC transmission and may potentially reduce the sagittal acetabular coverage, particularly in the 23 PSV subtype on the right side.

Effect of Spinopelvic Parameters on Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Spinopelvic parameters, including pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and pelvic incidence, have been developed to characterize the relationship between lumbar spine and hip motion, but a paucity of literature is available characterizing differences in spinopelvic parameters among patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) versus patients without FAIS, as well as the effect of these parameters on outcomes of arthroscopic treatment of FAIS.

PURPOSE

To (1) identify differences in spinopelvic parameters between patients with FAIS versus controls without FAIS; (2) identify associations between spinopelvic parameters and preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs); and (3) identify differences in PROs between patients with stiff spines (standing-sitting ΔSS ≤10°) versus those without.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

The study enrolled patients ≥18 years of age who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for treatment of FAIS with cam, pincer, or mixed (cam and pincer) morphology. Participants underwent preoperative standing-sitting imaging with a low-dose 3-dimensional radiography system and were matched on age and body mass index (BMI) to controls without FAIS who also underwent EOS imaging. Spinopelvic parameters measured on EOS films were compared between the FAIS and control groups. Patients with FAIS completed the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS) before surgery and at 1-year follow-up. Outcome scores were compared between patients with stiff spines versus those without. Associations between spinopelvic parameters and baseline outcome scores were assessed with Pearson correlations. Continuous variables were compared with Student t test and/or Mann-Whitney U test, and categorical variables were compared with Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients with FAIS (26 men; 24 women; mean age, 36.1 ± 10.7 years; mean BMI, 25.6 ± 4.2) were matched to 30 controls without FAIS (13 men; 17 women; mean age, 36.6 ± 9.5 years; mean BMI, 26.7 ± 3.6). Age, sex, and BMI were not significantly different between the FAIS and control groups (P > .05). Standing PT was not significantly different between stiff and non-stiff cohorts (P = .73), but sitting PT in the FAIS group was more than double that of the control group (36.5° vs 15.0°; P < .001). Incidence of stiff spine was significantly higher in the FAIS group (62.0% vs 3.3%; P < .001). Among FAIS patients, those with stiff spines had a significantly higher prevalence of cam impingement, whereas those with non-stiff spines had a higher prevalence of mixed impingement (P = .04). No significant differences were seen in preoperative mHHS or NAHS scores or pre- to postoperative improvement in scores between FAIS patients with stiff spines versus those without (P > .05), but a greater sitting SS was found to be positively correlated with a higher baseline mHHS (r = 0.36; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Patients with FAIS were more likely to have a stiff spine (standing-sitting ΔSS ≤10°) compared with control participants without FAIS. FAIS patients with stiff spines were more likely to have isolated cam morphology than patient without stiff spines. Although sitting SS was positively correlated with baseline mHHS, no significant differences were seen in 1-year postoperative outcomes between FAIS patients with versus without stiff spine.

Hip Arthroscopy Patients With Lower Back Pain Show Delayed Clinical Improvement and Inferior Time-Dependent Survivorship: A Propensity Matched Study at Mid-Term Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship at mid-term follow-up after hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients with and without preoperative lower back pain (LBP).

METHODS

Patients with self-endorsed preoperative LBP who underwent HA for FAIS with mid-term follow-up were identified and propensity matched 1:1 to patients without back pain by age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). PROs collected preoperatively and at postoperative years 1, 2, and 5 included Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain. Achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were compared. Survivorship was compared with Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 119 patients with LBP were matched to 119 patients without LBP. Group demographic factors were as follows: age (37.4 ± 11.9 vs 37.6 ± 12.6 years, P = .880), sex (64.4% vs 67.7% female, P = .796), and BMI (25.3 ± 5.1 vs 25.3 ± 5.4, P = .930). Average follow-up duration was 6.0 ± 1.9 years. LBP patients showed similar preoperative PROs, yet lower 1-year scores for all PROs (P ≤ .044). At final follow-up, similar PROs were shown between groups (P ≥ .196). LBP and non-LBP patients had similar MCID achievement for HOS-ADL (59.3% vs 63.1%, P = .640), HOS-SS (73.9% vs 70.8%, P = .710), mHHS (66.7% vs 73.4%, P = .544), iHOT-12 (85.1% vs 79.4%, P = .500), and VAS Pain (75.6% vs 69.9%, P = .490). Groups also had similar PASS achievement for HOS-ADL (63.5% vs 61.3%, P = .777), HOS-SS (57.0% vs 62.5%, P = .461), mHHS (81.9% vs 79.1%, P = .692), iHOT-12 (54.6% vs 61.2%, P = .570), and VAS Pain (51.0% vs 55.4%, P = .570). Additionally, achievement of MCID ≥ 1 PRO (P ≥ .490) and PASS ≥ 1 PRO (P ≥ .370) was similar across groups. Conversion to total hip arthroplasty occurred in 3.4% of hips with LBP and 0.8% of hips without LBP (P = .370). Back pain patients demonstrated inferior time-dependent survivorship compared with patients without back pain on Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (P = .023).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS with LBP achieve comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes to patients without back pain at mid-term, despite lower 1-year PRO scores. LBP patients show inferior reoperation-free time-dependent survivorship compared with those without LBP.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative case series.

The Effect of Pelvic Incidence on Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement and Acetabular Labral Tears

BACKGROUND

In the setting of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), decompression osteoplasties reconcile deleterious loading patterns caused by cam and pincer lesions. However, native variations of spinopelvic sagittal alignment may continue to perpetuate detrimental effects on the labrum, chondrolabral junction, and articular cartilage after hip arthroscopy.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of pelvic incidence (PI) on postoperative outcomes after hip arthroscopy for acetabular labral tears in the setting of FAI.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective query of prospectively collected data identified patients ≥18 years of age who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAI and acetabular labral tears between February 2014 and January 2022, with 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-ups. Measurements for PI, pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and acetabular version were obtained via advanced diagnostic imaging. Patients were stratified into low-PI (<45°), moderate-PI (45°≤ PI ≤ 60°), and high-PI (>60°) cohorts. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), clinically meaningful outcomes (ie, minimal clinically important difference, Patient Acceptable Symptom State, substantial clinical benefit, and maximal outcome improvement), visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, and patient satisfaction were compared across cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients met eligibility criteria and were stratified into low-PI (n = 28), moderate-PI (n = 31), and high-PI (n = 15) cohorts. Correspondingly, patients with high PI displayed significantly greater values for PT (P = .001), SS (P < .001), acetabular version (P < .001), and acetabular inclination (P = .049). By the 12- and 24-month follow-ups, the high-PI cohort was found to have significantly inferior PROMs, VAS pain scores, rates of clinically meaningful outcome achievement, and satisfaction relative to patients with moderate and/or low PI. No significant differences were found between cohorts regarding rates of revision arthroscopy, subsequent spine surgery, or conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

After hip arthroscopy, patients with a high PI (>60°) exhibited inferior PROMs, rates of achieving clinically meaningful thresholds, and satisfaction at 12 and 24 months relative to patients with low or moderate PI. Conversely, the outcomes of patients with low PI (<45°) were found to match the trajectory of those with a neutral spinopelvic alignment (45°≤ PI ≤ 60°). These findings highlight the importance of analyzing spinopelvic parameters preoperatively to prognosticate outcomes before hip arthroscopy for acetabular labral tears and FAI.

Editorial Commentary: Physical Therapy Alone May Not Successfully Treat Patients With Hip Pain and Large α Angles or Decreased Femoral Anteversion Combined With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Understanding the relation between spinopelvic (lumbopelvic) tilt and femoracetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is complex, and determining the optimal patient parameters that lead to successful nonoperative management is vital. Physical therapy (PT) focusing on core and posterior chain strengthening is often successful. PT can change the posterior tilt of the pelvis by 5° to 10°, allowing increased range of motion (ROM) and decreased impingement of the hip. However, PT does not change cam anatomy. Thus, PT alone may not sufficiently increase ROM in patients with cam-type impingement and large α angles or limited femoral anteversion. Pelvic compensation may lead to successful nonoperative management of FAIS, but not in all patients. Large-cam, high-flexion athletes with chronic hip pain should try PT. Yet, while some patients with large cam lesions may improve without surgery if femoral version and/or pelvic tilt ROM can be increased, surgery should not be excessively delayed in patients with poor prognostic factors for nonoperative management.

The influence of the sacral slope on pelvic kinematics and clinical manifestations in femoroacetabular impingement

INTRODUCTION

The radiological study of the sagittal alignment of the spine in static and dynamic positions has allowed a better understanding of the clinical results of total hip prostheses. According to the Roussouly classification, the sacral slope in a standing position characterizes the patient with a stiff spine (less than 35̊) or a flexible spine (greater than 35̊). The objectives of this study were to compare, in a population of patients operated on for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), firstly, the kinematics of the lumbar-pelvic-femoral complex and secondly, the clinical presentation depending on whether the spine is stiff or flexible.

HYPOTHESIS

Patients with stiff spines (SS<35̊) were "hip users" and had less ability to compensate for their hip pathology.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

This prospective and comparative multicenter study was conducted with patients operated on arthroscopically for FAI between 2020 and 2021. All patients included received preoperative EOS imaging of the lower limbs and spine, in standing and seated positions. The following parameters were measured: pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), and sacral slope (SS), as well as dynamic parameters (intrinsic mobility of the hip: delta standing/sitting femoral sacral angle, and of the pelvis: delta standing/sitting sacral slope). The functional result was evaluated at 1 year.

RESULTS

In the stiff spine group, 62 patients were included versus 138 in the flexible spine group. The mean follow-up was 15.1±3.3 months (9.2-24.3). Nineteen patients were lost to follow-up and there were 2 revisions for iterative arthroscopy. Intrinsic pelvic mobility and intrinsic hip mobility were 16̊±13.5 (-12; 44) and 44.5̊±28.5 (-9; 99) respectively in the stiff spine group. In the flexible spine group, these same measurements were 22̊±11.5 (-30; 45) and 29.7̊±22.7 (-33; 82) respectively. In the stiff spine group, the symptoms occurred at a significantly younger age: 28.3 years±9.5 (18-51) versus 31 years±8 (18-54) (p=0.017).

DISCUSSION

The sacral slope is a determining factor in the kinematics of impingement and the appearance of symptoms. The sacral slope helps define the concept of a "hip user" in symptomatic FAI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.