Clinical Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopic Surgery in Patients With Femoral Retroversion: A Matched Study to Patients With Normal Femoral Anteversion

Association of Idiopathic Cam Morphology With Femoral and Acetabular Version: Analysis of 986 Cadaveric Hips

Background

Studies have correlated symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with femoral retroversion and cam lesions.

Purpose

To investigate any association between femoral and acetabular versions with cam deformity in a largely asymptomatic population.

Study Design

Descriptive laboratory study.

Methods

A total of 986 cadaveric hips were selected from a historical osteologic collection. Each hip was assessed to determine the femoral and acetabular versions, anterior offset, and alpha angle. Cam morphology was defined as an alpha angle >60°. Multiple regression analysis was performed to determine the relationship between age, femoral version, acetabular version, and either alpha angle or anterior femoral offset.

Results

The mean alpha angle and anterior offset for the sample population were 48.1°± 10.4° and 0.77 ± 0.17 cm, respectively, with cam morphology in 149 of the 986 (15.1%) specimens. No significant difference was observed between hips with and without cam morphology with respect to the femoral (10.8°± 10° vs 10.3°± 9.6°; P = .58) or acetabular versions (17.4°± 6° vs 18.2°± 6.3°; P = .14). Multiple regression analysis did not demonstrate an association between the femoral or acetabular versions and the alpha angle, and it showed a small association between the increasing femoral and acetabular versions and a decreased anterior femoral offset (both P < .01).

Conclusion

In a large random sample of cadaveric hips, cam morphology was not associated with femoral or acetabular retroversion. Combined with the existing literature, these findings suggest that retroversion is not associated with cam development.

Clinical Relevance

This study provides insight into the development of cam morphology, which may eventually aid in the evaluation and treatment of FAI.

Large Hip Impingement Area and Subspine Hip Impingement in Patients With Absolute Femoral Retroversion or Decreased Combined Version

Background

It remains unclear if femoral retroversion is a contraindication for hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

Purpose

To compare the area and location of hip impingement at maximal flexion and during the FADIR test (flexion, adduction, internal rotation) in FAI hips with femoral retroversion, hips with decreased combined version, and asymptomatic controls.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Twenty-four symptomatic patients (37 hips) with anterior FAI were evaluated. All patients had femoral version (FV) <5° according to the Murphy method. Two subgroups were analyzed: 13 hips with absolute femoral retroversion (FV <0°) and 29 hips with decreased combined version (McKibbin index <20°). All patients were symptomatic and had anterior groin pain and a positive anterior impingement test ; all had undergone pelvic computed tomography (CT) scans to measure FV. The asymptomatic control group consisted of 26 hips. Dynamic impingement simulation of maximal flexion and FADIR test at 90° of flexion was performed with patient-specific CT-based 3-dimensional models. Extra- or intra-articular hip impingement area and location were compared between the subgroups and with control hips using nonparametric tests.

Results

Impingement area was significantly larger for hips with decreased combined version (<20°) versus combined version (≥20°) (mean ± SD; 171 ± 140 vs 78 ± 55 mm²; P = .012) and was significantly larger for hips with FV <0° (absolute femoral retroversion) vs FV >0° (P = .025). Hips with absolute femoral retroversion had a significantly higher frequency of extra-articular subspine impingement versus controls (92% vs 0%; P < .001), compared to 84% of patients with decreased combined version. Intra-articular femoral impingement location was most often (95%) anterosuperior and anterior (2-3 o'clock). Anteroinferior femoral impingement location was significantly different at maximal flexion (anteroinferior [4-5 o'clock]) versus the FADIR test (anterosuperior and anterior [2-3 o'clock]) (P < .001).

Conclusion

Patients with absolute femoral retroversion (FV <0°) had a larger hip impingement area, and most exhibited extra-articular subspine impingement. Preoperative FV assessment with advanced imaging (CT/magnetic resonance imaging) could help to identify these patients (without 3-dimensional modeling). Femoral impingement was located anteroinferiorly at maximal flexion and anterosuperiorly and anteriorly during the FADIR test.

Femoral Version May Impact Hip Arthroscopy Outcomes in Select Patient Populations: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To provide further clarity regarding the management of patients with abnormal femoral version in the setting of hip arthroscopy and will discuss the definition of femoral version, the diagnostic and clinical evaluation of abnormal femoral version, and several described measurement techniques.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in literature published before August 2021 that measured femoral version and reported patient-reported outcomes measures or rates of subsequent procedures following hip arthroscopy. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed and the electronic databases, PubMed, OvidMedLine, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. Two blinded reviews screened and evaluated data quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included with 11 studies reporting patient outcomes and 7 studies reporting rates of subsequent procedures. The most commonly used definition of femoral version was 5° to 20° of femoral anteversion. Computed tomography scan was the most commonly used imaging modality. The majority of studies (7 of 11) demonstrated that femoral version does not have an impact on patient-reported outcomes measures and is not predictive of clinically meaningful improvement scores. However, in select studies, patients with femoral retroversion were found to experience slightly inferior outcomes following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. While femoral retroversion may be a risk factor for subsequent procedures, 3 of 7 studies refute this claim. Although in patients with borderline hip dysplasia, excessive femoral anteversion led to greater rates of subsequent hip procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

While the majority of studies show that femoral version does not have an impact on patient-reported outcomes following hip arthroscopy, those with femoral retroversion and with excessive anteversion with coexisting borderline hip dysplasia need to be educated on their increased risk of subsequent operation. Ultimately, this review suggests that clinical improvement can likely be achieved regardless of femoral version.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

How frequent is absolute femoral retroversion in symptomatic patients with cam- and pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement?

Aims

The frequency of severe femoral retroversion is unclear in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). This study aimed to investigate mean femoral version (FV), the frequency of absolute femoral retroversion, and the combination of decreased FV and acetabular retroversion (AR) in symptomatic patients with FAI subtypes.

Methods

A retrospective institutional review board-approved observational study was performed with 333 symptomatic patients (384 hips) with hip pain due to FAI evaluated for hip preservation surgery. Overall, 142 patients (165 hips) had cam-type FAI, while 118 patients (137 hips) had mixed-type FAI. The allocation to each subgroup was based on reference values calculated on anteroposterior radiographs. CT/MRI-based measurement of FV (Murphy method) and AV were retrospectively compared among five FAI subgroups. Frequency of decreased FV < 10°, severely decreased FV < 5°, and absolute femoral retroversion (FV < 0°) was analyzed.

Results

A significantly (p < 0.001) lower mean FV was found in patients with cam-type FAI (15° (SD 10°)), and in patients with mixed-type FAI (17° (SD 11°)) compared to severe over-coverage (20° (SD 12°). Frequency of decreased FV < 10° was significantly (p < 0.001) higher in patients with cam-type FAI (28%, 46 hips) and in patients with over-coverage (29%, 11 hips) compared to severe over-coverage (12%, 5 hips). Absolute femoral retroversion (FV < 0°) was found in 13% (5 hips) of patients with over-coverage, 6% (10 hips) of patients with cam-type FAI, and 5% (7 hips) of patients with mixed-type FAI. The frequency of decreased FV< 10° combined with acetabular retroversion (AV < 10°) was 6% (8 hips) in patients with mixed-type FAI and 5% (20 hips) in all FAI patients. Of patients with over-coverage, 11% (4 hips) had decreased FV < 10° combined with acetabular retroversion (AV < 10°).

Conclusion

Patients with cam-type FAI had a considerable proportion (28%) of decreased FV < 10° and 6% had absolute femoral retroversion (FV < 0°), even more for patients with pincer-type FAI due to over-coverage (29% and 13%). This could be important for patients evaluated for open hip preservation surgery or hip arthroscopy, and each patient requires careful personalized evaluation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):557–565.

Outcomes for the Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome With Acetabular Retroversion: A 3D Computed Tomography Analysis

BACKGROUND

Increased attention has been directed toward the acetabular morphology in the management of patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Whether acetabular version influences patient-reported outcomes remains poorly understood.

PURPOSE

To use computed tomography (CT)-based 3-dimensional (3D) bone models to (1) quantify acetabular version in patients with FAIS, (2) compare acetabular version on 3D bone models with current plain radiographic parameters, and (3) explore the relationship between the magnitude of acetabular version and minimum 2-year clinical outcomes after hip arthroscopy.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Three-dimensional models of the pelvis and femur were generated by semiautomated segmentation and aligned to a standard coordinate system. Acetabular version was quantified at the 3-o'clock position, and 3 groups were identified: acetabular retroversion (AR; <15°), normal acetabular version (NV; 15°-25°), and acetabular anteversion (AA; >25°). Patient demographic characteristics, plain radiographic parameters, and clinical outcomes were analyzed, including the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction.

RESULTS

Preoperative CT scans were acquired in 105 consecutive patients before hip arthroscopy for FAIS, of which 84 (80.0%) completed minimum 2-year patient-reported outcomes. The mean ± SD age and body mass index of patients were 33.9 ± 12.6 years and 26.0 ± 5.4, respectively; 70.2% were female. The number of patients and the mean central acetabular version within each group were as follows: AR (n = 12; 11.3°± 2.7°), NV (n = 56; 20.7°± 2.9°), and AA (n = 16; 28.5°± 2.7°). Posterior wall sign was the only plain radiographic parameter that was significantly more observed in the AR group than in the other 2 groups. At minimum 2-year follow-up, significant between-group differences in the mHHS, iHOT-12, and VAS for pain and satisfaction (P < .05) were appreciated, while post hoc analysis with Bonferroni correction (P < .0167) found lower scores on the mHHS, iHOT-12, and VAS for pain and satisfaction in patients with AR as compared with NV. Lower scores on the VAS for satisfaction were reported in patients with AR when compared with AA (P = .006) but not on the mHHS (P = .023), iHOT-12 (P = .032), or VAS for pain (P = .072).

CONCLUSION

Traditional plain radiographic indices to describe AR, including crossover sign and ischial spine sign, were not reliable in defining AR according to 3D models derived from CT scans. Only the posterior wall sign was observed in a higher proportion in the AR group. Patients with AR demonstrated inferior outcomes when compared with patients with NV and AA after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

The Effect of Femoral and Acetabular Version on Outcomes Following Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Torsional hip deformities are common among patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. However, recent studies have suggested conflicting outcomes following arthroscopy in the setting of abnormal hip version. The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the literature and determine the impact of femoral and acetabular version on patient-reported outcomes following primary arthroscopic hip surgery.

METHODS

This study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Studies investigating femoral and acetabular version in primary hip arthroscopy with clinical outcomes were identified, and data were extracted in duplicate.

RESULTS

Overall, 11 studies met inclusion criteria and comprised 1,297 hips (726 femora and 571 acetabulae), with a mean patient age of 29.2 years (range, 14 to 74.7 years). In patients with acetabular retroversion, there was no significant difference, when compared with the normal acetabular version group, in the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), the Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores postoperatively. Among patients with femoral retroversion, in 2 of 3 studies, the authors reported no difference in mHHS postoperatively compared with patients with normal femoral version. In patients with high femoral anteversion, in 2 of 3 studies, the authors reported a significant difference in postoperative mHHS favoring patients with normal femoral version. Studies examining high femoral anteversion included patients with borderline hip dysplasia and patients who underwent concurrent psoas-lengthening procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the definition of the normal version of the hip varied within the literature, hip arthroscopy in patients with acetabular retroversion resulted in no difference in functional outcomes compared with patients with normal version. Postoperative functional outcomes in patients with femoral retroversion and high femoral anteversion were mixed, although the procedure was possibly less effective in high femoral anteversion combined with specific clinical scenarios. Further prospective studies based on standardized definitions and version analysis techniques would be useful in identifying the precise surgical indications for safe arthroscopic surgical procedures in patients with version abnormalities of the femur and acetabulum, particularly those with high femoral anteversion and retroversion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Clinically Significant Outcome Improvement After Hip Arthroscopy in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome and Severe Femoral Torsion

Background:

The influence of femoral torsion on clinically significant outcome improvement after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) has not been well-studied.

Purpose:

To quantify femoral torsion in FAIS patients using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and explore the relationship between femoral torsion and clinically significant outcome improvement after hip arthroscopy.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Included were patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS between January 2012 and August 2018 and had 2-year follow-up and preoperative MRI scans containing transcondylar slices of the knee. Participants were categorized as having severe retrotorsion (SR; <0°), normal torsion (NT; 0°-25°), and severe antetorsion (SA; >25°) as measured on MRI. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included the Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score–Sports Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score, 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction. Achievement of Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) were analyzed among cohorts.

Results:

Included were 183 patients (SR, n = 13; NT, n = 154; SA, n = 16) with a mean age, body mass index, and femoral torsion of 30.6 ± 12.1 years, 24.0 ± 4.4 kg/m², and 12.55° ± 9.58°, respectively. The mean torsion was –4.5° ± 2.6° for the SR, 12.1° ± 6.8° for the NT, and 31.0° ± 3.6° for the SA group. There were between-group differences in the proportion of patients who achieved PASS and SCB on the iHOT-12, pain VAS, and any PRO (P < .05). Post hoc analysis indicated that the SA group achieved lower rates of PASS and SCB on the iHOT-12 and pain VAS, and lower rates of PASS on any PRO versus the SR group (P < .05); the SR group achieved higher rates of PASS and SCB on pain VAS scores versus the NT group (P = .003).

Conclusion:

The orientation and severity of femoral torsion during hip arthroscopy influenced the propensity for clinically significant outcome improvement. Specifically, patients with femoral retrotorsion and femoral antetorsion had higher and lower rates of clinically significant outcome improvement, respectively.

Influence of Femoral Version on the Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopic Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement or Labral Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether abnormal femoral version (FV) affects the outcomes of hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) or labral tears.

PURPOSE

To review the outcomes of hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI or labral tears in patients with normal versus abnormal FV.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched in July 2020 for studies reporting the outcomes after primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI or labral tears in patients with femoral retroversion (<5°), femoral anteversion (>20°), or normal FV (5°-20°). The primary outcome was the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and secondary outcomes were the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), failure rate, and patient satisfaction. The difference in preoperative and postoperative scores (Δ) was also calculated when applicable.

RESULTS

Included in this review were 5 studies with 822 patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI or labral tears; there were 166 patients with retroversion, 512 patients with normal version, and 144 patients with anteversion. Patients with retroversion and normal version had similar postoperative mHHS scores (mean difference [MD], 2.42 [95% confidence interval (CI), -3.42 to 8.26]; P = .42) and ΔmHHS scores (MD, -0.70 [96% CI, -8.56 to 7.15]; P = .86). Likewise, the patients with anteversion and normal version had similar postoperative mHHS scores (MD, -3.09 [95% CI, -7.66 to 1.48]; P = .18) and ΔmHHS scores (MD, -1.92 [95% CI, -6.18 to 2.34]; P = .38). Regarding secondary outcomes, patients with retroversion and anteversion had similar ΔNAHS scores, ΔHOS-SSS scores, ΔVAS scores, patient satisfaction, and failure rates to those with normal version, although a significant difference was found between the patients with retroversion and normal version regarding postoperative NAHS scores (MD, 5.96 [95% CI, 1.66-10.26]; P = .007) and postoperative HOS-SSS scores (MD, 7.32 [95% CI, 0.19-14.44]; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

The results of this review indicated that abnormal FV did not significantly influence outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI or labral tears.

Characterizing irreparable: a retrospective machine learning analysis of patients who undergo primary labral reconstruction during hip arthroscopy

Hip labrum reconstruction has been demonstrated to be a viable option for patients with irreparable labral tears. However, there is a lack of data analyzing patient and labral characteristics in those undergoing primary hip labral reconstruction. To use a machine learning technique to subcategorize patients who underwent labral reconstruction during primary hip arthroscopy and to determine if there may be varying pathology resulting in severe labral damage. Patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction between 2015 and 2018 were included. Patients with a prior ipsilateral hip surgery, who were unwilling to participate, or had incomplete preoperative data were excluded. Agglomerative hierarchical clustering analysis was conducted to identify the subgroups of patients. A comparison was performed for preoperative characteristics, intraoperative findings and procedures. Of the 191 patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction and were eligible, 174 were included in the clustering analysis. Two distinct groups were identified (Group 1: 112 patients, 64.4%; Group 2: 62 patients, 35.6%). Group 1 had a significantly higher proportion of females (61.6% versus 43.5%; P &lt; 0.05), combined Seldes I and II labral tears (94.6% versus 54.8%; P &lt; 0.05), and larger tears. Group 2 had a significantly higher rate of labral calcification (82.3% versus 3.6%; P &lt; 0.05). The results of this study demonstrate two distinct groups of patients who underwent primary hip labral reconstruction: those with severe labral damage, and those with a calcified labrum. Approximately two-thirds were placed in the group with severe labral damage, while the other third had diminished quality secondary to calcific changes. Retrospective comparative trial; Level of Evidence, 3.

Teamwork in hip preservation: the ISHA 2019 Annual Scientific Meeting

Hip preservation surgery is now an established part of orthopedic surgery and sports medicine. This report describes the key findings of the 11th Annual Scientific Meeting of International Society for Hip Arthroscopy-the International Hip Preservation Society-in Madrid, Spain from 16 to 19 October 2019. Lectures, seminars and debates explored the most up-to-date and expert views on a wide variety of subjects, including: diagnostic problems in groin pain, buttock pain and low back pain; surgical techniques in acetabular dysplasia, hip instability, femoroacetabular impingement syndrome, labral repair and reconstruction, cartilage defects, adolescent hips and gluteus medius and hamstring tears; and new ideas about femoral torsion, hip-spine syndrome, hip capsule surgery, impact of particular sports on hip injuries, registries, robotics and training for hip preservation specialists. Surgeons, sports physicians, radiologists and physiotherapists looking after young people with hip problems have an increasingly sophisticated armoury of ideas and techniques with which to help their patients. The concept of hip preservation has developed incredibly fast over the last decade; now it is clear that the best results can only be achieved by a multidisciplinary team working together. The 2020s will be the decade of 'Teamwork in Hip Preservation'.

Editorial Commentary: Treating Hip Impingement Without a Computed Tomography Scan? You Might as Well Operate With a Blindfold

Hip impingement is defined as a bony conflict between the femur and acetabulum occurring throughout normal or supraphysiological range of motion. Traditionally, the cause was attributed to reduced femoral head-neck offset and/or excessive acetabular coverage, giving rise to cam, pincer, and mixed impingement. However, recent outcome studies showing less favorable results of hip arthroscopy in patients with femoral and acetabular version abnormalities have sparked renewed interest in the pathomechanics of hip impingement. We now have a greater appreciation for the 3-dimensional scope of the problem through specialized computed tomography sequencing allowing assessment of the entire limb and pelvis. Consequently, we have learned that rotational hip range of motion is more strongly correlated with combined femoral and acetabular version than with the sphericity of the femoral head, allowing us to counsel patients accordingly. We also recognize that impingement can occur with little to no femoral asphericity if the combined femoral and acetabular version does not permit adequate clearance for unimpeded motion. This improved understanding can be applied to diagnose subtle and uncommon cases of impingement and will ultimately enable a more complete bony resection.

Physical Activity Following Hip Arthroscopy in Young and Middle-Aged Adults: A Systematic Review

Background

Hip arthroscopy is a common surgical intervention for young and middle-aged adults with hip-related pain and dysfunction, who have high expectations for returning to physical activity following surgery. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the impact of hip arthroscopy on physical activity post-arthroscopy.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases was undertaken in identifying studies from January 1st 1990 to December 5th 2019. The search included English language articles reporting physical activity as an outcome following hip arthroscopy in adults aged 18-50 years. Quality assessment, data extraction and synthesis of included studies were undertaken.

Results

Full text articles (n = 234) were assessed for eligibility following screening of titles and abstracts (n = 2086), yielding 120 studies for inclusion. The majority (86%) of the studies were level 4 evidence. One study reported objective activity data. The most frequently occurring patient-reported outcome measure was the Hip Outcome Score-sport-specific subscale (HOS-SS, 84% of studies). Post--arthroscopy improvement was indicated by large effect sizes for patient-reported outcome measures (standard paired difference [95% confidence interval] −1.35[−1.61 to −1.09] at more than 2 years post-arthroscopy); however, the majority of outcome scores for the HOS-SS did not meet the defined level for a patient-acceptable symptom state.

Conclusion

The current level of available information regarding physical activity for post arthroscopy patients is limited in scope. Outcomes have focused on patients’ perceived difficulties with sport-related activities with a paucity of information on the type, quality and quantity of activity undertaken.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review of Level 2 through to Level 4 studies