[Operative treatment of T-type fractures of the acetabulum via surgical hip dislocation or Stoppa approach]

OBJECTIVE: Anatomic reduction and stable fixation by means of tissue- preserving surgical approaches. INDICATIONS Displaced acetabular fractures. Surgical hip dislocation approach with larger displacement of the posterior column in comparison to the anterior column, transtectal fractures, additional intraarticular fragments, marginal impaction. Stoppa approach with larger displacement of the anterior column in comparison to the posterior column. A combined approach might be necessary with difficult reduction. CONTRAINDICATIONS Fractures > 15 days (then ilioinguinal or extended iliofemoral approaches). Suprapubic catheters and abdominal problems (e.g., previous laparotomy due to visceral injuries) with Stoppa approach (then switch to classic ilioinguinal approach). SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Surgical hip dislocation: lateral decubitus position. Straight lateral incision centered over the greater trochanter. Entering of the Gibson interval. Digastric trochanteric osteotomy with protection of the medial circumflex femoral artery. Opening of the interval between the piriformis and the gluteus minimus muscle. Z-shaped capsulotomy. Dislocation of the femoral head. Reduction and fixation of the posterior column with plate and screws. Fixation of the anterior column with a lag screw in direction of the superior pubic ramus. Stoppa approach: supine position. Incision according to Pfannenstiel. Longitudinal splitting of the anterior portion of the rectus sheet and the rectus abdominis muscle. Blunt dissection of the space of Retzius. Ligation of the corona mortis, if present. Blunt dissection of the quadrilateral plate and the anterior column. Reduction of the anterior column and fixation with a reconstruction plate. Fixation of the posterior column with lag screws. If necessary, the first window of the ilioinguinal approach can be used for reduction and fixation of the posterior column. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: During hospital stay, intensive mobilization of the hip joint using a continuous passive motion machine with a maximum flexion of 90 degrees . No active abduction and passive adduction over the body's midline, if a surgical dislocation was performed. Maximum weight bearing 10-15 kg for 8 weeks. Then, first clinical and radiographic follow-up. Deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis for 8 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: 17 patients with a mean follow-up of 3.2 years. Ten patients were operated via surgical hip dislocation, two patients with a Stoppa approach, and five using a combined or alternative approach. Anatomic reduction was achieved in ten of the twelve patients (83%) without primary total hip arthroplasty. Mean operation time 3.3 h for surgical hip dislocation and 4.2 h for the Stoppa approach. Complications comprised one delayed trochanteric union, one heterotopic ossification, and one loss of reduction. There were no cases of avascular necrosis. In two patients, a total hip arthroplasty was performed due to the development of secondary hip osteoarthritis

Femoral morphology differs between deficient and excessive acetabular coverage

Structural deformities of the femoral head occurring during skeletal development (eg, Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease) are associated with individual shapes of the acetabulum but it is unclear whether differences in acetabular shape are associated with differences in proximal femoral shape. We questioned whether the amount of acetabular coverage influences femoral morphology. We retrospectively compared the proximal femoral anatomy of 50 selected patients (50 hips) with developmental dysplasia of the hip (lateral center-edge angle [LCE] or = 14 degrees ) with 45 selected patients (50 hips) with a deep acetabulum (LCE > or = 39 degrees ). Using MRI arthrography we measured head sphericity, epiphyseal shape, epiphyseal extension, and femoral head-neck offset. A deep acetabulum was associated with a more spherical head shape, increased epiphyseal height with a pronounced extension of the epiphysis towards the femoral neck, and an increased offset. In contrast, dysplastic hips showed an elliptical femoral head, decreased epiphyseal height with a less pronounced extension of the epiphysis, and decreased head-neck offset. Hips with different acetabular coverage are associated with different proximal femoral anatomy. A nonspherical head in dysplastic hips could lead to joint incongruity after an acetabular reorientation procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective comparative study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

How Does the dGEMRIC Index Change After Surgical Treatment for FAI? A Prospective Controlled Study: Preliminary Results.

BACKGROUND Delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) allows an objective, noninvasive, and longitudinal quantification of biochemical cartilage properties. Although dGEMRIC has been used to monitor the course of cartilage degeneration after periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for correction of hip dysplasia, such longitudinal data are currently lacking for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). QUESTIONS/PURPOSES (1) How does the mean acetabular and femoral dGEMRIC index change after surgery for FAI at 1-year followup compared with a similar group of patients with FAI treated without surgery? (2) Does the regional distribution of the acetabular and femoral dGEMRIC index change for the two groups over time? (3) Is there a correlation between the baseline dGEMRIC index and the change of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 1-year followup? (4) Among those treated surgically, can dGEMRIC indices distinguish between intact and degenerated cartilage? METHODS We performed a prospective, comparative, nonrandomized, longitudinal study. At the time of enrollment, the patients' decision whether to undergo surgery or choose nonoperative treatment was not made yet. Thirty-nine patients (40 hips) who underwent either joint-preserving surgery for FAI (20 hips) or nonoperative treatment (20 hips) were included. The two groups did not differ regarding Tönnis osteoarthritis score, preoperative PROMs, or baseline dGEMRIC indices. There were more women (60% versus 30%, p = 0.003) in the nonoperative group and patients were older (36 ± 8 years versus 30 ± 8 years, p = 0.026) and had lower alpha angles (65° ± 10° versus 73° ± 12°, p = 0.022) compared with the operative group. We used a 3.0-T scanner and a three-dimensional dual flip-angle gradient-echo technique for the dGEMRIC technique for the baseline and the 1-year followup measurements. dGEMRIC indices of femoral and acetabular cartilage were measured separately on the initial and followup radial dGEMRIC reformats in direct comparison with morphologic radial images. Regions of interest were placed manually peripherally and centrally within the cartilage based on anatomic landmarks at the clockface positions. The WOMAC, the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and the modified Harris hip score were used as PROMs. Among those treated surgically, the intraoperative damage according to the Beck grading was recorded and compared with the baseline dGEMRIC indices. RESULTS Although both the operative and the nonoperative groups experienced decreased dGEMRIC indices, the declines were more pronounced in the operative group (-96 ± 112 ms versus -16 ± 101 ms on the acetabular side and -96 ± 123 ms versus -21 ± 83 ms on the femoral side in the operative and nonoperative groups, respectively; p < 0.001 for both). Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy and surgical hip dislocation experienced decreased dGEMRIC indices; the decline in femoral dGEMRIC indices was more pronounced in hips after surgical hip dislocation (-120 ± 137 ms versus -61 ± 89 ms, p = 0.002). In the operative group a decline in dGEMRIC indices was observed in 43 of 44 regions over time. In the nonoperative group a decline in dGEMRIC indices was observed in four of 44 regions over time. The strongest correlation among patients treated surgically was found between the change in WOMAC and baseline dGEMRIC indices for the entire joint (R = 0.788, p < 0.001). Among those treated nonoperatively, no correlation between baseline dGEMRIC indices and change in PROMs was found. In the posterosuperior quadrant, the dGEMRIC index was higher for patients with intact cartilage compared with hips with chondral lesions (592 ± 203 ms versus 444 ± 205 ms, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS We found a decline in acetabular, femoral, and regional dGEMRIC indices for the surgically treated group at 1-year followup despite an improvement in all PROMs. We observed a similar but less pronounced decrease in the dGEMRIC index in symptomatic patients without surgical treatment indicating continuous cartilage degeneration. Although treatment of FAI is intended to alter the forces acting across the hip by eliminating impingement, its effects on cartilage biology are not clear. dGEMRIC provides a noninvasive method of assessing these effects. Longer term studies will be needed to determine whether the matrix changes of the bradytrophic cartilage seen here are permanent or clinically important. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level II, therapeutic study

[Impingement of the hip].

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) describes the repetitive painful contact between the acetabulum, the pelvis and the proximal femur. This bony abutment can lead to a characteristic pattern of chondrolabral damage and is one of the main etiological factors in the development of juvenile osteoarthritis of the hip joint. This article describes the current treatment concepts of FAI and the radiological assessment including an overview of standard measurement methods, coxometric parameters and cut-off values. Furthermore, the authors stress the importance of a profound understanding of the entire configuration of the pelvis and the dynamic interplay of its components

Acetabular retroversion: Diagnosis and treatment

Acetabular retroversion (AR) consists of a malorientation of the acetabulum in the sagittal plane. AR is associated with changes in load transmission across the hip, being a risk factor for early osteoarthrosis. The pathophysiological basis of AR is an anterior acetabular hyper-coverage and an overall pelvic rotation.The delay or the non-diagnosis of AR could have an impact in the overall management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). AR is a subtype of (focal) pincer deformity.The objective of this review was to clarify the pathophysiological, diagnosis and treatment fundaments inherent to AR, using a current literature review.Radiographic evaluation is paramount in AR: the cross-over, the posterior wall and ischial spine signs are classic radiographic signs of AR. However, computed tomography (CT) evaluation permits a three-dimensional characterization of the deformity, being more reliable in its recognition.Acetabular rim trimming (ART) and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) are the best described surgical options for the treatment of AR.The clinical outcomes of both techniques are dependent on the correct characterization of existing lesions and adequate selection of patients. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:595-603. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180015

Evaluation of range of motion restriction within the hip joint

In Total Hip Arthroplasty, determining the impingement free range of motion requirement is a complex task. This is because in the native hip, motion is restricted by both impingement as well as soft tissue restraint. The aim of this study is to determine a range of motion benchmark which can identify motions which are at risk from impingement and those which are constrained due to soft tissue. Two experimental methodologies were used to determine motions which were limited by impingement and those motions which were limited by both impingement and soft tissue restraint. By comparing these two experimental results, motions which were limited by impingement were able to be separated from those motions which were limited by soft tissue restraint. The results show motions in extension as well as flexion combined with adduction are limited by soft tissue restraint. Motions in flexion, flexion combined with abduction and adduction are at risk from osseous impingement. Consequently, these motions represent where the maximum likely damage will occur in femoroacetabular impingement or at most risk of prosthetic impingement in Total Hip Arthroplasty