Pablo A Slullitel, Marcos Latorre, Francisco Principe, Felipe Patterson, Gerardo Zanotti, Fernando Comba, Martin A Buttaro
{"title":"髋臼是股骨后翻的间接x线征象。","authors":"Pablo A Slullitel, Marcos Latorre, Francisco Principe, Felipe Patterson, Gerardo Zanotti, Fernando Comba, Martin A Buttaro","doi":"10.1177/11207000251335223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To report the association between os acetabuli and relevant radiologic measurements in a series of surgically treated hip preservation patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 654 hips who underwent preservation surgery between 2012 and 2019, identifying 50 cases with os acetabuli (7.64%). We included 300 hips (277 patients) with radiographs and CT-scans obtained during preoperative assessment, after which the cohort was divided into two groups (with and without os acetabuli). Mean age of the study population was 35 (interquartile range [IQR] 28-42) years old, with 192 (62%) being males. 2 observers measured demographic and radiologic variables. A mixed-effects logistic regression tested the ability of radiologic measurements to predict the presence of os acetabuli.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No between-group differences were found in terms of sex (156/250 vs. 36/50 males, <i>p =</i> 0.197), alpha angle (64 ± 13° vs. 65 ± 14°, <i>p =</i> 0.372), Tönnis angle (8 ± 7° vs. 7 ± 7°, <i>p =</i> 0.152), neck-shaft angle (132 ± 6° vs. 131 ± 5°, <i>p =</i> 0.199) and CT-acetabular version (16 ± 7° vs. 15 ± 6°, <i>p =</i> 0.221). Significant differences were found in terms of age (34 ± 9 vs. 39 ± 7 years, <i>p =</i> 0.002), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) (31 ± 9° vs. 34 ± 7°, <i>p =</i> 0.045), anterior wall index (AWI) (0.45 [IQR 0.37-0.54] vs 0.5 [IQR 0.39-0.6], <i>p =</i> 0.046), CT-femoral version (17 ± 5° vs. 8 ± 4°, <i>p <</i> 0.001), cross-over sign (96/250 vs. 28/50, <i>p =</i> 0.032) and baseline diagnosis (184/250 vs. 44/50 FAIs, <i>p =</i> 0.043), with the os acetabuli-group being older, with more FAI diagnosis/cross-over sign, and with higher LCEA, higher AWI, and a lower femoral version. After adjusting for confounders, only CT-femoral version (odds ratio 0.32; 95% CI. 0.14-0.73, <i>p <</i> 0.007) was associated with presence of os acetabuli.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Presence of acetabular rim fragments was significantly associated with a lower femoral version. Above 20° of femoral version, the likelihood of os acetabuli was almost zero. Treatment of os acetabuli (i.e., fixation vs. removal) should be adjusted for the underlying diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":12911,"journal":{"name":"HIP International","volume":" ","pages":"11207000251335223"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Os acetabuli is an indirect radiographic sign of femoral retroversion.\",\"authors\":\"Pablo A Slullitel, Marcos Latorre, Francisco Principe, Felipe Patterson, Gerardo Zanotti, Fernando Comba, Martin A Buttaro\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/11207000251335223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To report the association between os acetabuli and relevant radiologic measurements in a series of surgically treated hip preservation patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 654 hips who underwent preservation surgery between 2012 and 2019, identifying 50 cases with os acetabuli (7.64%). We included 300 hips (277 patients) with radiographs and CT-scans obtained during preoperative assessment, after which the cohort was divided into two groups (with and without os acetabuli). Mean age of the study population was 35 (interquartile range [IQR] 28-42) years old, with 192 (62%) being males. 2 observers measured demographic and radiologic variables. A mixed-effects logistic regression tested the ability of radiologic measurements to predict the presence of os acetabuli.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No between-group differences were found in terms of sex (156/250 vs. 36/50 males, <i>p =</i> 0.197), alpha angle (64 ± 13° vs. 65 ± 14°, <i>p =</i> 0.372), Tönnis angle (8 ± 7° vs. 7 ± 7°, <i>p =</i> 0.152), neck-shaft angle (132 ± 6° vs. 131 ± 5°, <i>p =</i> 0.199) and CT-acetabular version (16 ± 7° vs. 15 ± 6°, <i>p =</i> 0.221). Significant differences were found in terms of age (34 ± 9 vs. 39 ± 7 years, <i>p =</i> 0.002), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) (31 ± 9° vs. 34 ± 7°, <i>p =</i> 0.045), anterior wall index (AWI) (0.45 [IQR 0.37-0.54] vs 0.5 [IQR 0.39-0.6], <i>p =</i> 0.046), CT-femoral version (17 ± 5° vs. 8 ± 4°, <i>p <</i> 0.001), cross-over sign (96/250 vs. 28/50, <i>p =</i> 0.032) and baseline diagnosis (184/250 vs. 44/50 FAIs, <i>p =</i> 0.043), with the os acetabuli-group being older, with more FAI diagnosis/cross-over sign, and with higher LCEA, higher AWI, and a lower femoral version. After adjusting for confounders, only CT-femoral version (odds ratio 0.32; 95% CI. 0.14-0.73, <i>p <</i> 0.007) was associated with presence of os acetabuli.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Presence of acetabular rim fragments was significantly associated with a lower femoral version. Above 20° of femoral version, the likelihood of os acetabuli was almost zero. Treatment of os acetabuli (i.e., fixation vs. removal) should be adjusted for the underlying diagnosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HIP International\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"11207000251335223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HIP International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000251335223\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIP International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000251335223","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Os acetabuli is an indirect radiographic sign of femoral retroversion.
Background: To report the association between os acetabuli and relevant radiologic measurements in a series of surgically treated hip preservation patients.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 654 hips who underwent preservation surgery between 2012 and 2019, identifying 50 cases with os acetabuli (7.64%). We included 300 hips (277 patients) with radiographs and CT-scans obtained during preoperative assessment, after which the cohort was divided into two groups (with and without os acetabuli). Mean age of the study population was 35 (interquartile range [IQR] 28-42) years old, with 192 (62%) being males. 2 observers measured demographic and radiologic variables. A mixed-effects logistic regression tested the ability of radiologic measurements to predict the presence of os acetabuli.
Results: No between-group differences were found in terms of sex (156/250 vs. 36/50 males, p = 0.197), alpha angle (64 ± 13° vs. 65 ± 14°, p = 0.372), Tönnis angle (8 ± 7° vs. 7 ± 7°, p = 0.152), neck-shaft angle (132 ± 6° vs. 131 ± 5°, p = 0.199) and CT-acetabular version (16 ± 7° vs. 15 ± 6°, p = 0.221). Significant differences were found in terms of age (34 ± 9 vs. 39 ± 7 years, p = 0.002), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) (31 ± 9° vs. 34 ± 7°, p = 0.045), anterior wall index (AWI) (0.45 [IQR 0.37-0.54] vs 0.5 [IQR 0.39-0.6], p = 0.046), CT-femoral version (17 ± 5° vs. 8 ± 4°, p < 0.001), cross-over sign (96/250 vs. 28/50, p = 0.032) and baseline diagnosis (184/250 vs. 44/50 FAIs, p = 0.043), with the os acetabuli-group being older, with more FAI diagnosis/cross-over sign, and with higher LCEA, higher AWI, and a lower femoral version. After adjusting for confounders, only CT-femoral version (odds ratio 0.32; 95% CI. 0.14-0.73, p < 0.007) was associated with presence of os acetabuli.
Conclusions: Presence of acetabular rim fragments was significantly associated with a lower femoral version. Above 20° of femoral version, the likelihood of os acetabuli was almost zero. Treatment of os acetabuli (i.e., fixation vs. removal) should be adjusted for the underlying diagnosis.
期刊介绍：
HIP International is the official journal of the European Hip Society. It is the only international, peer-reviewed, bi-monthly journal dedicated to diseases of the hip. HIP International considers contributions relating to hip surgery, traumatology of the hip, prosthetic surgery, biomechanics, and basic sciences relating to the hip. HIP International invites reviews from leading specialists with the aim of informing its readers of current evidence-based best practice.
The journal also publishes supplements containing proceedings of symposia, special meetings or articles of special educational merit.
HIP International is divided into six independent sections led by editors of the highest scientific merit. These sections are:
• Biomaterials
• Biomechanics
• Conservative Hip Surgery
• Paediatrics
• Primary and Revision Hip Arthroplasty
• Traumatology
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
