Which Radiographic Hip Parameters Do Not Have to Be Corrected for Pelvic Rotation and Tilt?

Abstract

Background Acetabular anatomy on AP pelvic radiographs depends on pelvic orientation during radiograph acquisition. However, not all parameters may change to a clinically relevant degree with differences in pelvic orientation. This issue may influence the diagnosis of acetabular pathologies and planning of corrective acetabular surgery (reorientation or rim trimming). However, to this point, it has not been well characterized. Questions/purposes We asked (1) which radiographic parameters change in a clinical setting when normalized to neutral pelvic orientation; (2) which parameters do not change in an experimental setting when the pelvis is experimentally rotated/tilted; and (3) which of these changes are ''ultimately'' relevant based on a prespecified definition of relevance. Methods In a clinical setup, 11 hip parameters were evaluated in 101 patients (126 hips) by two observers and the interobserver difference was calculated. All parameters were normalized to an anatomically defined neutral pelvic orientation with the help of a lateral pelvic radiograph and specific software. Differences between nonnormalized and normalized values were calculated (effect of normalization). In an experimental setup involving 20 cadaver pelves (40 hips), the maximum range for each parameter was computed with the pelvis rotated (range, À12°to 12°) and tilted (range, À24°to 24°). ''Ultimately'' relevant changes existed if the effect of normalization exceeded the interobserver difference (eg, 37% versus 6% for prevalence of a positive crossover sign) and/or the maximum experimental range exceeded 1 SD of interobserver difference (eg, 27% versus 6% for anterior acetabular coverage). Results In the clinical setup, all parameters except the ACM angle and craniocaudal acetabular coverage changed when being normalized, eg, effect of normalization for lateral center-edge angle, acetabular index, and sharp angle ranged from À5°to 4°(p values \ 0.029). In the experimental setup, five parameters showed no major changes, whereas six parameters did change (all p values \ 0.001). Ultimately relevant changes were found for anteroposterior acetabular coverage, retroversion index, and prevalence of a positive crossover or posterior wall sign. Conclusions Lateral center-edge angle, ACM angle, Sharp angle, acetabular and extrusion index, and craniocaudal acetabular coverage showed no relevant changes with varying pelvic orientation and can therefore be acquired independent from individual pelvic tilt and

What Are the Radiographic Reference Values for Acetabular Under- and Overcoverage?

“…These values can be used for radiographic evaluation of symptomatic hips, possible predictors of surgical outcomes, and as an adjunct for clinical decisionmaking. As shown in a previous study [29], the following parameters can be reliably measured without necessarily compensating for pelvic tilt and rotation on an AP pelvic radiograph (ie, without a true lateral radiograph): LCE angle, Sharp angle, acetabular and extrusion index, and craniocaudal coverage. Similar to what has been shown for the dysplastic hips [20], future studies need to investigate the natural course of hips with acetabular overcoverage.…”

The Warwick Agreement on femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI syndrome): an international consensus statement

“…A pelvic radiograph allows an overall assessment of the pelvis and hips, and exclusion of other painful conditions such as fracture, acetabular dysplasia and osteoarthritis. Ideally, this radiograph should be centred on the pubic symphysis, without rotation, and with neutral pelvic tilt 3 50. The shape of the acetabulum can be interpreted from this radiograph,51 but visualising the shape of the proximal femur requires an orthogonal view of the femoral neck.…”

Correction of Pelvic Tilt and Pelvic Rotation in Cup Measurement after THA – An Experimental Study

“…The same problem is known during the measurement of parameters of the native acetabulum [33,34]. Software tools are successfully applied to normalize parameters of the native acetabulum [35] and the cup position in THA [14].…”