Higashihira S, Kobayashi N, Choe H, Sumi K, Inaba Y. Use of a 3D Virtually Reconstructed Patient-Specific Model to Examine the Effect of Acetabular Labral Interference on Hip Range of Motion.
Orthop J Sports Med 2020;
8:2325967120964465. [PMID:
33241061 PMCID:
PMC7675874 DOI:
10.1177/2325967120964465]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2020] [Accepted: 06/08/2020] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background:
The labrum is likely to influence impingement, which may also depend on
acetabular coverage. Simulating impingement using 3-dimensional (3D)
computed tomography (CT) is a potential solution to evaluating range of
motion (ROM); however, it is based on bony structures rather than on soft
tissue.
Purpose:
To examine ROM when the labrum is considered in a 3D dynamic simulation. A
particular focus was evaluation of maximum flexion and internal rotation
angles before occurrence of impingement, comparing them in cases of cam-type
femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and borderline developmental dysplasia of
the hip (BDDH).
Study Design:
Descriptive laboratory study.
Methods:
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and CT scans of 40 hips (20 with cam-type
FAI and 20 with BDDH) were reviewed retrospectively. The thickness and width
of the labrum were measured on MRI scans. A virtual labrum was reconstructed
based on patient-specific sizes measured on MRI scans. The impingement point
was identified using 3D dynamic simulation and was compared with the
internal rotation angle before and after labral reconstruction.
Results:
The thickness and width of the labrum were significantly larger in BDDH than
in FAI (P < .001). In FAI, the maximum internal rotation
angles without the labrum were 30.3° at 90° of flexion and 56.9° at 45° of
flexion, with these values decreasing to 18.7° and 41.4°, respectively,
after labral reconstruction (P < .001). In BDDH, the
maximum internal rotation angles were 48.0° at 90° of flexion and 76.7° at
45° of flexion without the labrum, decreasing to 31.1° and 55.3°,
respectively, after labral reconstruction (P < .001).
The differences in the angles before and after labral reconstruction were
larger in BDDH than in FAI (90° of flexion, P = .03; 45° of
flexion, P = .01).
Conclusion:
As the labrum was significantly more hypertrophic in BDDH than in FAI, the
virtual labral model revealed that the labrum’s interference with the
maximum internal rotation angle was also significantly larger in BDDH.
Clinical Relevance:
The labrum has a significant effect on impingement; this is more significant
for BDDH than for FAI.
Collapse