scholarly journals Validity of direct magnetic resonance arthrogram in patients with femoroacetabular impingement and their outcome post hip arthroscopy

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 204-208
Author(s):  
Rahul Mohan ◽  
P. Nithin Unnikrishnan ◽  
Ravindra Gudena
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Arthrogram

scholarly journals INSTRUMENTAL DIAGNOSIS AND PREOPERATIVE PLANNING OF HIP ARTHROSCOPY IN FEMOROACETABULAR IMPINGEMENT SYNDROME

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleg E. Bogopolskii
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Joint ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Impingement Syndrome ◽  
Pelvic Bone ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Technical Equipment ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Abstract. Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI) is essentially a mechanical conflict that occurs when the acetabulum edge of the pelvic bone interacts with femur head and neck with clinical symptoms. In a basis of this conflict, as a rule, is a single or bilateral anatomical bone defect that causes an irregular shape of the hip joint with congenital or acquired etiology. Radiography, performed in a direct projection and in 45 Dunn position with external rotation of 40, is traditionally considered as basic tool for the radiological diagnosis of hip joint pathology. It allows to assess the anatomical and morphological structure of joint surfaces and their relationship. Detection of severe hip deformations may require computed tomography (CT). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) is used to assess the condition of soft tissue structures of hip joint, its damage is often found in patients with FAI. The modern method of treating patients with FAI is hip arthroscopy, the undeniable advantage of which is low traumatic nature of the operation, low level of intraoperative complications and short postoperative rehabilitation period. For its successful implementation, it is necessary to take into account the complexity of performing hip arthroscopy, its duration, the necessity for good technical equipment and a high skill level of the operating surgeon. However, this operation has a number of limitations, which must be taken into account when selecting patients.

Prevalence of Gluteus Medius Pathology on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement: Asymptomatic Tears Are Rare, Whereas Tendinosis Is Common

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (12) ◽  
pp. 2933-2938
Author(s):  
Mitchell B. Meghpara ◽  
Rishika Bheem ◽  
Sapan Shah ◽  
Jacob Shapira ◽  
David R. Maldonado ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Physical Examination ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Gluteus Medius ◽  
Full Thickness ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Mri Findings ◽  
Partial Thickness

Background: There is a paucity of literature on asymptomatic gluteus medius pathology. Moreover, no studies have examined the prevalence of asymptomatic gluteus medius pathology. Purpose: To describe the prevalence of asymptomatic gluteus medius pathology in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A database search of our institution was performed for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for labral treatment between February 2008 and January 2019. Patients were included if they had gluteus medius pathology identified through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patients were deemed to be asymptomatic if they lacked greater trochanteric hip tenderness, abductor weakness, a positive Trendelenburg sign, or a positive Trendelenburg gait on physical examination. Patients were excluded if they were unwilling to participate or did not have a documented physical examination or MRI read in the database. Results: A total of 2851 hips (2452 patients) met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Gluteus medius pathology was found in 871 hips (30.6%) on MRI. Symptomatic gluteus medius pathology was observed in 414 (14.5%) hips, of which 305 (10.7%) had tendinosis, 99 (3.5%) had partial-thickness tears, and 10 (0.4%) had full-thickness tears. Asymptomatic gluteus medius pathology was observed in 457 (16.0%) hips, of which 408 (14.3%) had tendinosis and 49 (1.7%) had partial-thickness tears. No hips with full-thickness tears on MRI were asymptomatic. Patients with asymptomatic partial-thickness tears were significantly older than those with only tendinosis (45.3 vs 39.4 years, respectively; P = .001). Patients aged 40 years or older had a 2.11 (1.80-2.50) ( P < .001) relative risk of asymptomatic pathology compared with patients younger than 40 years. Conclusion: Although there is a meaningful prevalence of asymptomatic gluteus medius tendinosis, the prevalence of asymptomatic gluteus medius tears is low. Treatment of gluteus medius tendinosis should therefore be based not solely on MRI findings but rather on a complete clinical evaluation. In contrast, MRI findings of partial or full-thickness gluteus medius tears may be more likely to have clinical significance.

scholarly journals Magnetic Resonance Arthrogram Improves Visualization of Hip Capsular Defects in Patients Undergoing Previous Hip Arthroscopy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly M. Tomasevich ◽  
Megan K. Mills ◽  
Hailey Allen ◽  
Amanda M. Crawford ◽  
Alexander J. Mortensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Arthrogram

Impairment Tutorial: Rating Tears of the Acetabular Labrum

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
Charles N. Brooks ◽  
Richard E. Strain ◽  
James B. Talmage
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Limited Range ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Joint Stability ◽  
Acetabular Labrum ◽  
Complete Excision ◽  
Limited Range Of Motion

Abstract The primary function of the acetabular labrum, like that of the glenoid, is to deepen the socket and improve joint stability. Tears of the acetabular labrum are common in older adults but occur in all age groups and with equal frequency in males and females. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, is silent about rating tears, partial or complete excision, or repair of the acetabular labrum. Provocative tests to detect acetabular labrum tears involve hip flexion and rotation; all rely on production of pain in the groin (typically), clicking, and/or locking with passive or active hip motions. Diagnostic tests or procedures rely on x-rays, conventional arthrography, computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA), and hip arthroscopy. Hip arthroscopy is the gold standard for diagnosis but is the most invasive and most likely to result in complications, and MRA is about three times more sensitive and accurate in detecting acetabular labral tears than MRI alone. Surgical treatment for acetabular labrum tears usually consists of arthroscopic debridement; results tend to be better in younger patients. In general, an acetabular labral tear, partial labrectomy, or labral repair warrants a rating of 2% lower extremity impairment. Evaluators should avoid double dipping (eg, using both a Diagnosis-related estimates and limited range-of-motion tests).

Capsular closure versus unrepaired interportal capsulotomy after hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement, results of a patient-blinded randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002110057
Author(s):  
Niels H Bech ◽  
Inger N Sierevelt ◽  
Sheryl de Waard ◽  
Boudijn S H Joling ◽  
Gino M M J Kerkhoffs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background: Hip capsular management after hip arthroscopy remains a topic of debate. Most available current literature is of poor quality and are retrospective or cohort studies. As of today, no clear consensus exists on capsular management after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of routine capsular closure versus unrepaired capsulotomy after interportal capsulotomy measured with NRS pain and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS). Materials and methods: All eligible patients with femoroacetabular impingement who opt for hip arthroscopy ( n = 116) were randomly assigned to one of both treatment groups and were operated by a single surgeon. Postoperative pain was measured with the NRS score weekly the first 12 weeks after surgery. The HAGOS questionnaire was measured at 12 and 52 weeks postoperatively. Results: Baseline characteristics and operation details were comparable between treatment groups. Regarding the NRS pain no significant difference was found between groups at any point the first 12 weeks after surgery ( p = 0.67). Both groups significantly improved after surgery ( p < 0.001). After 3 months follow-up there were no differences between groups for the HAGOS questionnaire except for the domain sport ( p = 0.02) in favour of the control group. After 12 months follow-up there were no differences between both treatment groups on all HAGOS domains ( p  > 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this randomised controlled trial show highest possible evidence that there is no reason for routinely capsular closure after interportal capsulotomy at the end of hip arthroscopy. Trial Registration: This trial was registered at the CCMO Dutch Trial Register: NL55669.048.15.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document