No abstract

Background: Given the high prevalence of patients with hip deformities and no ongoing hip dysfunction, understanding the anatomic factors predicting the symptomatic state is critical. One such variable is how the spinopelvic parameters (SPPs) may interplay with hip anatomic factors. Hypothesis/Purpose: SPPs and femoral- and acetabular-specific parameters may predict which patients will become symptomatic. The purpose was to determine which anatomic characteristics with specific cutoffs were associated with hip symptom development and how these parameters relate to each other. Study Design: Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: 548 participants were designated either symptomatic patients (n = 176, scheduled for surgery with hip pain and/or functional limitation) or asymptomatic volunteers (n = 372, no pain) and underwent 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Multiple femoral (α angle, Ω angle, neck angle, torsion), acetabular (version, coverage), and spinopelvic (pelvic tilt, sacral slope [SS], pelvic incidence) parameters were measured semiautomatically. Normative values, optimal differentiating thresholds, and a logistic regression analysis were computed. Results: Symptomatic patients had larger cam deformities (defined by increased Ω angle and α angle), smaller acetabular coverage, and larger pelvic incidence and SS angles compared with the asymptomatic volunteers. Discriminant receiver operating characteristic analysis confirmed that radial 2-o’clock α angle (threshold 58°-60°, sensitivity 75%-60%, specificity 80%-84%; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.831), Ω angle (threshold 43°, sensitivity 72%, specificity 70%; AUC = 0.830), acetabular inclination (threshold 6°, sensitivity 65%, specificity 70%; AUC = 0.709), and SS (threshold 44°, sensitivity 72%, specificity 75%; AUC = 0.801) ( P < .005) were the best parameters to classify participants. When parameters were entered into a logistic regression, significant positive predictors for the symptomatic patients were achieved for SS, acetabular inclination, Ω angle, and α angle at 2-o’clock, correctly classifying 85% of cases (model sensitivity 72%, specificity 91%; AUC = 0.919). Conclusion: Complex dynamic interplay exists between the hip and SPPs. A cam deformity, acetabular undercoverage, and increased SPP angles are predictive of a hip symptomatic state. SPPs were significant to discriminate between participants and were important in combination with other hip deformities. Symptomatic patients can be effectively differentiated from asymptomatic volunteers based on predictive anatomic factors.

This article presents the recommendations of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology Arthritis Subcommittee regarding the standards of the use of MRI in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal rheumatic diseases. The recommendations discuss (1) the role of MRI in current classification criteria of musculoskeletal rheumatic diseases (including early diagnosis of inflammation, disease follow-up, and identification of disease complications); (2) the impact of MRI on the diagnosis of axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and juvenile spondyloarthritis; (3) MRI protocols for the axial and peripheral joints; (4) MRI interpretation and reporting for axial and peripheral joints; and finally, (5) methods for assessing MR images including quantitative, semiquantitative, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI studies.

• Hip shape is symmetrical regardless of limb dominance. • Pincer/cam morphology is frequent in asymptomatic subjects (20 and 71%, respectively). • LCEA and acetabular version increases with age (5-7° between opposite age groups). • Femoral morphology is stable after physeal closure (in the absence of pathology). • Alpha and omega angle thresholds should be set according to sex.

Objectives: Imaging assessment for the clinical management of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) remains controversial because of a paucity of evidencebased guidance and notable variability in clinical practice, ultimately requiring expert consensus. The purpose of this agreement is to establish expert-based statements on FAIS imaging, using formal techniques of consensus building driven by relevant literature review. Methods:The validated Delphi method and peer-reviewed literature were used to formally derive consensus among 30 panel members (21 musculoskeletal radiologists and 9 orthopedic surgeons) from 13 countries.Forty-two questions were agreed on, and recent relevant seminal literature was circulated and classified in five major topics ("General issues", "Parameters and reporting", "Radiographic assessment", "MRI evaluation" and "Ultrasound") in order to produce answering statements.The level of evidence was noted for all produced statements and panel members were asked to score their level of agreement with each statement (0 to 10) during iterative rounds. Either "group consensus", "group agreement" or "no agreement" was achieved.Items near consensus were further queried using 4 moderated group sessions and in 4 Delphi rounds.Results: Forty-five statements were generated and group consensus was reached for 43 (95.7%). Seventeen of these statements were selected as most important for dissemination in advance. There was no agreement for the two statements pertaining to "Ultrasound". Conclusion:The first international Delphi-based consensus for the imaging assessment of FAIS was developed. The resulting consensus can serve as a tool to reduce variability in clinical practices and guide further research for the clinical management of FAIS. Key Points• FAI imaging literature is extensive although often of low level of evidence.• Radiographic evaluation with a reproducible technique is the cornerstone of hip imaging assessment.• MRI with a dedicated protocol is the gold standard imaging technique for FAI assessment.