4 research outputs found

    MRI hip morphology is abnormal in unilateral DDH and increased lateral limbus thickness is associated with residual DDH at minimum 10-year follow-up.

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE The purpose of the study was to compare the post-reduction magnetic resonance imaging morphology for hips that developed residual acetabular dysplasia, hips without residual dysplasia, and uninvolved contralateral hips in patients with unilateral developmental dysplasia of the hip undergoing closed or open reduction and had a minimum 10-year follow-up. METHODS Retrospective study of patients with unilateral dysplasia of the hip who underwent open/closed hip reduction followed by post-reduction magnetic resonance imaging. Twenty-eight patients with a mean follow-up of 13 ± 3 years were included. In the treated hips, residual dysplasia was defined as subsequent surgery for residual acetabular dysplasia or for Severin grade > 2 at latest follow-up. On post-reduction, magnetic resonance imaging measurements were performed by two readers and compared between the hips with/without residual dysplasia and the contralateral uninvolved side. Magnetic resonance imaging measurements included acetabular version, coronal/ axial femoroacetabular distance, acetabular depth-width ratio, osseous/cartilaginous acetabular indices, and medial/lateral (limbus) cartilage thickness. RESULTS Fifteen (54%) and 13 (46%) hips were allocated to the "no residual dysplasia" group and to the "residual dysplasia" group, respectively. All eight magnetic resonance imaging parameters differed between hips with residual dysplasia and contralateral uninvolved hips (all p < 0.05). Six of eight parameters differed (all p < 0.05) between hips with and without residual dysplasia. Among these, increased limbus thickness had the largest effect (odds ratio = 12.5; p < 0.001) for increased likelihood of residual dysplasia. CONCLUSIONS We identified acetabular morphology and reduction quality parameters that can be reliably measured on the post-reduction magnetic resonance imaging to facilitate the differentiation between hips that develop with/without residual acetabular dysplasia at 10 years postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE level III, prognostic case-control study

    Computed tomography-based automated 3D measurement of femoral version: Validation against standard 2D measurements in symptomatic patients.

    Get PDF
    To validate 3D methods for femoral version measurement, we asked: (1) Can a fully automated segmentation of the entire femur and 3D measurement of femoral version using a neck based method and a head-shaft based method be performed? (2) How do automatic 3D-based computed tomography (CT) measurements of femoral version compare to the most commonly used 2D-based measurements utilizing four different landmarks? Retrospective study (May 2017 to June 2018) evaluating 45 symptomatic patients (57 hips, mean age 18.7 ± 5.1 years) undergoing pelvic and femoral CT. Femoral version was assessed using four previously described methods (Lee, Reikeras, Tomczak, and Murphy). Fully-automated segmentation yielded 3D femur models used to measure femoral version via femoral neck- and head-shaft approaches. Mean femoral version with 95% confidence intervals, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated, and Bland-Altman analysis was performed. Automatic 3D segmentation was highly accurate, with mean dice coefficients of 0.98 ± 0.03 and 0.97 ± 0.02 for femur/pelvis, respectively. Mean difference between 3D head-shaft- (27.4 ± 16.6°) and 3D neck methods (12.9 ± 13.7°) was 14.5 ± 10.7° (p < 0.001). The 3D neck method was closer to the proximal Lee (-2.4 ± 5.9°, -4.4 to 0.5°, p = 0.009) and Reikeras (2 ± 5.6°, 95% CI: 0.2 to 3.8°, p = 0.03) methods. The 3D head-shaft method was closer to the distal Tomczak (-1.3 ± 7.5°, 95% CI: -3.8 to 1.1°, p = 0.57) and Murphy (1.5 ± 5.4°, -0.3 to 3.3°, p = 0.12) methods. Automatic 3D neck-based-/head-shaft methods yielded femoral version angles comparable to the proximal/distal 2D-based methods, when applying fully-automated segmentations

    The Effect of Modality and Landmark Selection on MRI and CT Femoral Torsion Angles.

    No full text
    Background Assessment of femoral torsion at preoperative hip imaging is commonly recommended. However, it is unclear whether MRI is as accurate as CT and how different methods affect femoral torsion measurements. Purpose To compare MRI- and CT-based assessment of femoral torsion by using four commonly used measurement methods in terms of agreement, reproducibility, and reliability and to compare femoral torsion angles between the four different measurement methods. Materials and Methods This retrospective study evaluated patients with hip pain who underwent CT and 3-T MRI of the hip including sequences of the pelvis and distal condyles between May 2017 and June 2018. The four measurement methods differed regarding the landmark levels for the proximal femoral reference axis and included measurements at the level of the greater trochanter, femoral neck, base of the femoral neck, and level of the lesser trochanter. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated, and Bland-Altman analysis was performed. Results Forty-five patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 19 years ± 5; 27 female) and 57 hips were evaluated. Inter- and intrarater reliability were excellent for each of the four CT- and MRI-based measurement methods (ICC range, 0.97-0.99). Mean difference between CT- and MRI-based measurement ranged from 0.3° ± 3.4 (P = .58) to 2.1° ± 4.1 (P < .001). Differences between CT and MRI were within the corresponding ICC variation for all four measurement methods. Mean torsion angles were greater by 17.6° for CT and 18.7° for MRI (all P < .001) between the most proximal to the most distal measurement methods. Conclusion MRI- and CT-based femoral torsion measurements showed high agreement and comparable reliability and reproducibility but were dependent on the level of selected landmarks used to define the proximal reference axis. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Zoga in this issue

    Hip Morphology on Post-Reduction MRI Predicts Residual Dysplasia 10 Years After Open or Closed Reduction.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND There is limited evidence supporting the value of morphological parameters on post-reduction magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to predict long-term residual acetabular dysplasia (RAD) after closed or open reduction for the treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). METHODS We performed a retrospective study of 42 patients (47 hips) undergoing open or closed reduction with a minimum 10 years of follow-up; 39 (83%) of the hips were in female patients, and the median age at reduction was 6.3 months (interquartile range [IQR], 3.3 to 8.9 months). RAD was defined as additional surgery with an acetabular index >2 standard deviations above the age- and sex-specific population-based mean value or Severin classification grade of >2 at last follow-up. Acetabular version and depth-width ratio, coronal and axial femoroacetabular distance, cartilaginous and osseous acetabular indices, transverse ligament thickness, and the thickness of the medial and lateral (limbus) acetabular cartilage were measured on post-reduction MRI. RESULTS At the time of final follow-up, 24 (51%) of the hips had no RAD; 23 (49%) reached a failure end point at a median of 11.4 years (IQR, 7.6 to 15.4 years). Most post-reduction MRI measurements, with the exception of the cartilaginous acetabular index, revealed a significant distinction between the group with RAD and the group with no RAD when mean values were compared. The coronal femoroacetabular distance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.00), with a 5-mm cutoff, and limbus thickness (AUC, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.99), with a 4-mm cutoff, had the highest discriminatory ability. A 5-mm cutoff for the coronal femoroacetabular distance produced 96% sensitivity (95% CI, 78% to 100%), 83% specificity (95% CI, 63% to 95%), 85% positive predictive value (95% CI, 65% to 96%), and 95% negative predictive value (95% CI, 76% to 100%). A 4-mm cutoff for limbus thickness had 96% sensitivity (95% CI, 78% to 100%), 63% specificity (95% CI, 41% to 81%), 71% positive predictive value (95% CI, 52% to 86%), and 94% negative predictive value (95% CI, 70% to 100%). CONCLUSIONS Coronal femoroacetabular distance, a quantitative metric assessing a reduction's concentricity, and limbus thickness, a quantitative metric assessing the acetabulum's cartilaginous component, help to predict hips that will have RAD in the long term after closed or open reduction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence
    corecore