scholarly journals Relationship between crossover sign and anterior center-edge angle

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 347-349
Author(s):  
Robert A. Christian ◽  
Michael H. McCarthy ◽  
Bennet A. Butler ◽  
Ekamjeet S. Dhillon ◽  
Michael A. Terry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crossover Sign ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Center Edge Angle

scholarly journals Radiographic Diagnosis of Pincer-Type Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596711770830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chanseok Rhee ◽  
Tina Le Francois ◽  
J. W. Thomas Byrd ◽  
Mark Glazebrook ◽  
Ivan Wong
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Crossover Sign ◽  
Radiographic Diagnosis ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Lateral Center Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge Angle

Background: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a well-recognized condition that causes hip pain and can lead to early osteoarthritis if not managed properly. With the increasing awareness and efficacy of operative treatments for pincer-type FAI, there is a need for consensus on the standardized radiographic diagnosis. Purpose: To perform a systematic review of the evidence regarding imaging modalities and radiographic signs for diagnosing pincer-type FAI. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A literature review was performed in 2016 using the Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase search engines. All articles focusing on a radiographic diagnosis of pincer-type FAI were reviewed. Each of the included 44 articles was assigned the appropriate level of evidence, and the particular radiographic marker and/or type of imaging were also summarized. Results: There were 44 studies included in the final review. Most of the articles were level 4 evidence (26 articles), and there were 12 level 3 and 6 level 2 articles. The crossover sign was the most commonly used radiographic sign (27/44) followed by the lateral center-edge angle (22/44). Anteroposterior (AP) pelvis plain radiographs were the most commonly used imaging modality (33 studies). Poor-quality evidence exists in support of most currently used radiographic markers, including the crossover sign, lateral center-edge angle, posterior wall sign, ischial spine sign, coxa profunda, acetabular protrusion, and acetabular index. There is poor-quality conflicting evidence regarding the use of the herniation pit to diagnose pincer-type FAI. Some novel measurements, such as β-angle, acetabular roof ratio, and acetabular retroversion index, have been proposed, but they also lack support from the literature. Conclusion: No strong evidence exists to support a single best set of current radiographic markers for the diagnosis of pincer-type FAI, largely due to the lack of better quality trials (levels 1 and 2) that compare conventional radiographic findings with the gold standard, which is the intraoperative findings. More sophisticated imaging modalities such as computed tomography and magnetic resonance arthrography are often needed to diagnose pincer-type FAI, and these investigations are relatively accurate in assessing labral pathology or cartilage damage.

scholarly journals LOW DOSE CT SCAN FOLLOWING PERIACETABULAR OSTEOTOMY: ASSESSMENT OF REDUCTION AND CORRELATION WITH RADIOGRAPHIC MEASURES

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0021
Author(s):  
Clarabelle DeVries ◽  
Jeffrey J Nepple ◽  
Lucas Fowler ◽  
Sean Akers ◽  
Gail Pashos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Periacetabular Osteotomy ◽  
Femoral Head Coverage ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Two Sectors ◽  
Posterior Sector ◽  
Center Edge Angle

Introduction: Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) has become a favored treatment for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia worldwide. Nevertheless, the parameters for optimal correction to avoid residual instability or iatrogenic impingement have not been defined. Purpose: The purposes of this study were (1) to assess the ability of PAO to correct femoral head coverage to normal ranges as measured by 3D CT scan and (2) to determine if postoperative radiographic parameters of dysplasia are accurate markers of optimal acetabular correction. Methods: A total of 43 hips (in 38 patients, mean 27.7 years, 88.4% female) were enrolled in this prospective cohort study at minimum 1 year after PAO. Postoperative femoral head coverage was assessed via low-dose CT and compared to normative data of asymptomatic hips from the literature. Anterior (3:00-1:15), lateral (1:00-11:00), and posterior (11:25-9:00) sector coverage was defined by averaging the coverage at 15 minute increments in each zone. Postoperative radiographs were utilized to measure lateral center edge angle (LCEA), anterior wall index (AWI), posterior wall index (PWI), and anterior center edge angle (ACEA). Good correction for each sector was defined as coverage from 1 SD below mean to 2 SD above mean. Results: Postoperatively, the anterior sector was normalized in 84% of hips, lateral sector in 84% of hips, and posterior sector in 86% of hips. Sixty-seven percent of hips were corrected to normative range in all three sectors and 19% were corrected in two sectors (86% in at least two sectors). LCEA and PWI showed the highest correlation with lateral and posterior sector coverage with Pearson’s correlation coefficients of 0.67 and 0.71 (p < 0.001), respectively. Weaker correlations were found between anterior coverage and the AWI and ACEA coverage (-0.16 and 0.15, respectively). Good correction was best correlated with the following target values for acetabular correction: LCEA 28°, AI 1°, AWI 0.37, ACEA 32°, and PWI 1.0. Conclusion: PAO can effectively normalize femoral head coverage compared to normative data. Good correction of each sector coverage ranged from 84-86% of cases. The proposed set of radiographic parameter targets were found to be reliable markers of femoral head coverage.

Center Edge Angle Measurement for Hip Preservation Surgery: Technique and Caveats

Orthopedics ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas A. Anderson ◽  
Jeremy Gililland ◽  
Christopher Pelt ◽  
Samuel Linford ◽  
Gregory J. Stoddard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Angle Measurement ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Surgery Technique ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Center Edge Angle

scholarly journals Lateral acetabular labral length is inversely related to acetabular coverage as measured by lateral center edge angle of Wiberg

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian D. Petersen ◽  
Bryan Wolf ◽  
Jeffrey R. Lambert ◽  
Carolyn W. Clayton ◽  
Deborah H. Glueck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acetabular Coverage ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Lateral Center Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge Angle

Measurement of the Center Edge Angle and Determination of the Severin Classification Using Digital Radiography, Computer-assisted Measurement Tools, and a Severin Algorithm

2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. e30-e35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen L. Carroll ◽  
Kathleen A. Murray ◽  
Lynne M. MacLeod ◽  
Theresa A. Hennessey ◽  
Marcella R. Woiczik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Measurement Tools ◽  
Center Edge Angle

Hip Distraction Without a Perineal Post: A Prospective Study of 1000 Hip Arthroscopy Cases

2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 632-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omer Mei-Dan ◽  
Matthew J. Kraeutler ◽  
Tigran Garabekyan ◽  
Jesse A. Goodrich ◽  
David A. Young
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Hip Distraction ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Distraction Force ◽  
Lateral Center Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge Angle

Background: Hip arthroscopy has traditionally been performed with a perineal post, resulting in various groin-related complications, including pudendal nerve neurapraxias, vaginal tears, and scrotal necrosis. Purpose: To assess the safety of a technique for hip distraction without the use of a perineal post. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We prospectively analyzed a consecutive cohort of 1000 hips presenting to a dedicated hip preservation clinic; all patients had hip pain and were subsequently treated with hip arthroscopy. Demographic variables, hip pathology, and lateral center edge angle were recorded for each case. In the operating room, the patient’s feet were placed in traction boots in a specifically designed distraction setup, and the operative table was placed in varying degrees of Trendelenburg. With this technique, enough resistance is created by gravity and friction between the patient’s body and the bed to allow for successful hip distraction without the need for a perineal post. In a subset of 309 hips (n = 281 patients), the degrees of Trendelenburg as well as the distraction force were analyzed. Results: The mean ± SD Trendelenburg angle used among the subset of 309 hips was 11° ± 2°. The mean initial distraction force necessary was 90 ± 28 lb, which decreased to 65 ± 24 lb by 30 minutes after traction initiation ( P < .0001). The most important variables in determining initial force for this cohort of patients were, in order of magnitude, sex ( P < .0001), weight ( P < .0001), and lateral center edge angle ( P < .01). No groin-related complications occurred among the entire cohort of patients, including soft tissue or nerve-related complications. The rate of deep venous thrombosis was 2 in 1000. Conclusion: The use of the Trendelenburg position and a specially designed distraction setup during hip arthroscopy allows for safe hip distraction without a perineal post, thereby eliminating groin-related soft tissue and nerve complications. Certain patient variables can be used to estimate the required distraction force and inclination angle with this method.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document