Indirect Head of the Rectus Femoris Tendon as a Graft for Segmental Hip Labral Reconstruction: An Anatomic, Radiographical, and Biomechanical Study in Comparison With Iliotibial Labral Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The indirect head of the rectus femoris (IHRF) tendon has been used as an autograft for segmental labral reconstruction. However, the biomechanical properties and anatomic characteristics of the IHRF, as they relate to surgical applications, have yet to be investigated.

PURPOSE

To (1) quantitatively and qualitatively describe the anatomy of IHRF and its relationship with surrounding arthroscopically relevant landmarks; (2) detail radiographic findings pertinent to IHRF; (3) biomechanically assess segmental labral reconstruction with IHRF, including restoration of the suction seal and contact pressures in comparison with iliotibial band (ITB) reconstruction; and (4) assess potential donor-site morbidity caused by graft harvesting.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive laboratory study.

METHODS

A cadaveric study was performed using 8 fresh-frozen human cadaveric full pelvises and 7 hemipelvises. Three-dimensional anatomic measurements were collected using a 3-dimensional coordinate digitizer. Radiographic analysis was accomplished by securing radiopaque markers of different sizes to the evaluated anatomic structures of the assigned hip.Suction seal and contact pressure testing were performed over 3 trials on 6 pelvises under 4 different testing conditions for each specimen: intact, labral tear, segmental labral reconstruction with ITB, and segmental labral reconstruction with IHRF. After IHRF tendon harvest, each full pelvis had both the intact and contralateral hip tested under tension along its anatomic direction to assess potential site morbidity, such as tendon failure or bony avulsion.

RESULTS

The centroid and posterior apex of the indirect rectus femoris attachment are respectively located 10.3 ± 2.6 mm and 21.0 ± 6.5 mm posteriorly, 2.5 ± 7.8 mm and 0.7 ± 8.0 mm superiorly, and 5.0 ± 2.8 mm and 22.2 ± 4.4 mm laterally to the 12:30 labral position. Radiographically, the mean distance of the IHRF to the following landmarks was determined as follows: anterior inferior iliac spine (8.8 ± 2.5 mm), direct head of the rectus femoris (8.0 ± 3.9 mm), 12-o'clock labral position (14.1 ± 2.8 mm), and 3-o'clock labral position (36.5 ± 4.4 mm). During suction seal testing, both the ITB and the IHRF reconstruction groups had significantly lower peak loads and lower energy to peak loads compared with both intact and tear groups (P = .01 to .02 for all comparisons). There were no significant differences between the reconstruction groups for peak loads, energy, and displacement at peak load. In 60° of flexion, there were no differences in normalized contact pressure and contact area between ITB or IHRF reconstruction groups (P > .99). There were no significant differences between intact and harvested specimen groups in donor-site morbidity testing.

CONCLUSION

The IHRF tendon is within close anatomic proximity to arthroscopic acetabular landmarks. In the cadaveric model, harvesting of the IHRF tendon as an autograft does not lead to significant donor-site morbidity in the remaining tendon. Segmental labral reconstruction performed with the IHRF tendon exhibits similar biomechanical outcomes compared with that performed with ITB.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study demonstrates the viability of segmental labral reconstruction with an IHRF tendon and provides a detailed anatomic description of the tendon in the context of an arthroscopic labral reconstruction. Clinicians can use this information during the selection of a graft and as a guide during an arthroscopic graft harvest.

Proximal femoral epiphyseal spurs and their association with acetabular labral tears on MRI in symptomatic patients

OBJECTIVE

Femoral epiphyseal spurs are developmental projections that form at the edge of the physis. Although considered incidental, their association with acetabular labral tears has never been examined. Our aim was to assess the prevalence of femoral epiphyseal spurs in symptomatic patients with mechanical hip pain and explore if they are associated with labral tears on MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hip MRI scans performed on a Siemens 3 T MRI using femoroacetabular impingement protocol were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were referred by orthopaedic surgeons for mechanical hip pain. Two musculoskeletal radiologists blinded to initial reports evaluated MRI images for the presence of an epiphyseal spur and acetabular labral changes. A consensus was achieved on all cases by the two readers. The association between epiphyseal spurs and labral changes was assessed using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients (178 hip MRI scans) were reviewed; the mean age was 28.8 years (SD 7.1). There were 52 females (45.2%) and 63 males (54.8%). There were 115 hips with labral tears (64.6%). Fourteen hips (7.8%) in ten patients (8.7%) demonstrated epiphyseal spurs and all of them showed labral tears (100%). There was statistically significant association between epiphyseal spurs and labral tears on MRI (p value = 0.0024).

CONCLUSION

Femoral epiphyseal spurs were observed in 8.7% of our defined patient population, and all patients with epiphyseal spurs demonstrated labral tears. Epiphyseal spurs should be documented on imaging reports due to their potential association with labral tears. Future research is needed to further delineate and guide management of these entities.