Abnormalities in femoral version are highly prevalent in patients with hip pain who are eligible for hip preservation surgery, and severe abnormalities are prevalent in 1 of 6 patients (17%). Based on these results, the evaluation of young patients with hip pain should always include an assessment of femoral version and acetabular version to best decide what treatment approach should be undertaken to optimize outcomes.

Background Correct quantification of femoral torsion is crucial to diagnose torsional deformities, make an indication for surgical treatment, or plan the amount of correction. However, no clear evaluation of different femoral torsion measurement methods for hips with excessive torsion has been performed to date. Questions/purposes (1) How does CT-based measurement of femoral torsion differ among five commonly used measurement methods? (2) Do differences in femoral The institution of one or more of the authors (FS, KAS, MT) has received, during the study period, funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation, outside the submitted work. Each author certifies that neither he, nor any member of his immediate family, has funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® neither advocates nor endorses the use of any treatment, drug, or device. Readers are encouraged to always seek additional information, including FDA approval status, of any drug or device before clinical use. Each author certifies that his institution approved the human protocol for this investigation and that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research. Drs Schmaranzer and Lerch share first co-authorship.

Background: It remains unclear whether decreased femoral version (FV) causes anterior intra- or extra-articular femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Therefore, we evaluated symptomatic hips with decreased FV, with and without cam and pincer FAI, by using computed tomography (CT)–based virtual 3-dimensional (3D) impingement simulation and compared this group with patients with normal FV and with asymptomatic hips. Purpose: To investigate (1) the osseous range of motion, (2) the osseous femoral and acetabular impingement zones, and (3) whether hip impingement is extra- or intra-articular in symptomatic hips with FAI. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: An institutional review board–approved, retrospective comparative analysis was performed on a total of 84 hips in 68 participants. Of these, 37 hips in 24 symptomatic patients with FAI had decreased FV. These hips were compared with 21 hips of 18 symptomatic patients with anterior FAI with normal FV (10°-25°) and 26 asymptomatic hips with no FAI and normal FV. All patients with FAI were symptomatic and had anterior hip pain and a positive anterior impingement test. They underwent pelvic CT scans to measure FV. Decreased FV was defined as FV less than 5°. The 37 hips with decreased FV presented both with and without cam and pincer FAI. All 84 hips were evaluated by use of CT-based 3D models and a validated 3D range of motion and impingement simulation. Asymptomatic hips were contralateral normal hips imaged in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Results: Hips with FAI combined with decreased FV had a significantly ( P < .001) lower mean flexion (114°± 8° vs 125°± 13°) and internal rotation (IR) at 90° of flexion (18°± 6° vs 32°± 9°, P < .001) compared with the asymptomatic control group. Symptomatic patients with FAI and normal FV had flexion of 120°± 16° and IR at 90° of flexion of 23°± 15°. In a subgroup analysis, we found a significantly ( P < .001) lower IR in 90° of flexion in hips with FV less than 5° combined with mixed-type FAI compared with hips with FV less than 5° without a cam- or pincer-type deformity. The maximal acetabular impingement zone for hips with decreased FV was located at the 2-o’clock position and ranged from 1 to 3 o’clock. In hips with decreased FV, most of the impingement locations were intra-articular but 32% of hips had combined intra- and extra-articular FAI in internal rotation in 90° of flexion. During the flexion-adduction-IR test performed in 10° and 20° of adduction, extra-articular subspine FAI had significantly ( P < .001) higher prevalence (68% and 84%) in hips with decreased FV compared with normal hips. Conclusion: Hips with FAI and decreased FV had less flexion and internal rotation in 90° of flexion compared with the asymptomatic control group. The majority of hip impingement due to low FV was intra-articular, but one-third of samples had combined intra- and extra-articular subspine FAI. Anterior extra- and intra-articular hip impingement can be present in patients who have FAI with decreased FV. This could be important for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy.