Hypermobile Hip Syndrome

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.

Hypermobile Disorders and Their Effects on the Hip Joint

Hypermobility, or joint hyperlaxity, can result from inherited connective tissue disorders or from micro- or macrotrauma to a joint. The supraphysiologic motion of the hip joint results in capsuloligamentous damage, and these patients have a propensity to develop femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and labral injury. In this review, the recent literature evaluating the definitions, history, incidence, genetics, and histology of hypermobile disorders is investigated. We then review the clinical evaluation, natural history, and resulting instability for patients presenting with a hypermobile hip. Lastly, treatment options and outcomes will be highlighted.

Hip Dysplasia

Acetabular dysplasia represents a structural pathomorphology associated with hip pain, instability, and osteoarthritis. The wide spectrum of dysplasia anatomically refers to a 3-dimensional volumetric- and surface area-based insufficiency in coverage and is classified based on the magnitude and location of undercoverage. Borderline dysplasia has been variably defined and leads to management challenges. In symptomatic dysplasia, treatment addresses coverage with periacetabular osteotomy. Concomitant simultaneous or staged hip arthroscopy has significant advantages to address intra-articular pathology. In nonarthritic individuals, there is evidence PAO alters the natural history of dysplasia and decreases the risk of hip arthritis and total hip arthroplasty.

Microinstability of the hip: a systematic review of the imaging findings

OBJECTIVES

To undertake a systematic review of the morphologic features associated with hip microinstability and determine whether there are suggestive or diagnostic imaging findings.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were searched up to September 2019 to identify original research reporting morphologic features in individuals with either a clinical diagnosis of hip microinstability (instability without overt subluxation/dislocation) or those with symptomatic laxity demonstrated on imaging (increased femoral head translation/distraction or capsular volume). Studies focussing on individuals with pre-existing hip conditions (including definite dysplasia (lateral centre edge angle < 20°), significant trauma, previous dislocation or surgery were excluded. Methodological quality was assessed by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies met inclusion criteria (clinical diagnosis of microinstability n = 15 and demonstration of laxity n = 7). Imaging information gathered from the studies includes radiographs (n = 14), MRI (n = 6), MR arthrography (n = 4), CT (n = 1) and intraoperative examination. Most studies exhibited design features associated with an overall high or unclear risk of bias. Some dysplastic features are associated with microinstability or laxity reference measures; however, microinstability is frequently diagnosed in those with a lateral centre edge angle > 25°. Other associated imaging findings reported include impingement morphology, anterior labral tearing, femoral head chondral injury, ligamentum teres tears and capsular attenuation.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature does not provide strong evidence for imaging features diagnostic of microinstability. In the appropriate clinical context, dysplastic morphology, anterior labral tears and ligamentum teres tears may be suggestive of this condition although further research is needed to confirm this.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42019122406.

Editorial Commentary: What Exactly Is Impingement-Can Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging "See" Impingement in Femoroacetabular Impingement?

The diagnosis of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome requires that 3 prerequisites are met. Patient symptoms and physical examination must be combined with imaging to appropriately make the diagnosis. Imaging, including plain radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computed tomography, should be interpreted in the context of a high prevalence of cam and pincer morphology, in addition to labral injury, in the general population. All images routinely obtained in current clinical practice are 2-dimensional representations of complex 3-dimensional processes. Although computerized modeling can dynamically manipulate femur and pelvis independently in fluoroscopy-, computed tomography-, and/or MRI-based collision detection models, the exact definition of "impingement" eludes the current literature. High-resolution, high magnet strength (minimum 3 Tesla), physiologic and/or biochemical dynamic MRI has the potential to image both soft and osseous tissues, interacting to best define hip impingement.