髋关节镜检查中髋臼形态的术中评估:标准X线摄影与透视的比较——一项尸体研究

Intraoperative Evaluation of Acetabular Morphology in Hip Arthroscopy Comparing Standard Radiography Versus Fluoroscopy: A Cadaver Study.

作者信息

Büchler Lorenz, Schwab Joseph M, Whitlock Patrick W, Beck Martin, Tannast Moritz

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Bern, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, U.S.A.

出版信息

Arthroscopy. 2016 Jun;32(6):1030-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.12.048. Epub 2016 Mar 15.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare quantitative measurements of acetabular morphology obtained using intraoperative fluoroscopy, to standardized anteroposterior (AP) pelvis radiographs.

METHODS

Ten dried human pelvis specimens (20 hips) were imaged using hip-centered fluoroscopy and standardized AP pelvis radiographs. Each hip was evaluated for acetabular version and coverage, including lateral center edge (LCE) angle, acetabular index (AI), total anterior and posterior coverage, and crossover sign.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences existed between the mean LCE angle (fluoroscopy 36.5° ± 8.3° v plain films 36.1° ± 7.9°, P = .59), acetabular index (0.6° ± 8.6° v 0.2° ± 7.1°, P = .61), ACM angle (44.0° ± 2.6° v 44.1° ± 3.8°, P = .89), Sharp's angle (31.8° ± 5.7° v 32.4° ± 3.9°, P = .44), and the total femoral coverage (80.9% ± 6.4% v 80.7% ± 7.5%, P = .83). Conversely, total anterior coverage (30.7% ± 8.5% v 33.3% ± 8.2%, P < .0001) appeared significantly decreased and the total posterior coverage (54.1% ± 6.9% v 49.1% ± 7.8%, P < .0001) appeared significantly increased in fluoroscopy compared with plain film radiographs. Fluoroscopy also failed to identify the presence of a crossover sign in 30% and underestimated the retroversion index (9% ± 16%, v 13% ± 16%, P = .016).

CONCLUSIONS

The values for the LCE angle and AI determined by hip-centered fluoroscopy did not differ from those obtained by standardized AP plain film radiography. However, fluoroscopy leads to a more anteverted projection of the acetabulum with significantly decreased total anterior coverage, significantly increased total posterior coverage, and underestimated signs of retroversion compared with standardized AP pelvis radiography.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study shows reliable LCE and AI angles but significant differences in the projected anteversion of the acetabulum between standardized AP pelvis radiography and hip-centered fluoroscopy.

摘要

目的

比较术中透视与标准化前后位(AP)骨盆X线片所获得的髋臼形态学定量测量结果。

方法

使用以髋关节为中心的透视和标准化AP骨盆X线片对10个干燥的人体骨盆标本(20个髋关节)进行成像。对每个髋关节评估髋臼前倾和覆盖情况,包括外侧中心边缘(LCE)角、髋臼指数(AI)、前后总覆盖范围以及交叉征。

结果

平均LCE角(透视36.5°±8.3°,平片36.1°±7.9°,P = 0.59)、髋臼指数(0.6°±8.6°,平片0.2°±7.1°,P = 0.61)、ACM角(44.0°±2.6°,平片44.1°±3.8°,P = 0.89)、夏普角(31.8°±5.7°,平片32.4°±3.9°,P = 0.44)以及股骨总覆盖范围(80.9%±6.4%,平片80.7%±7.5%,P = 0.83)之间均无统计学显著差异。相反,与平片相比,透视显示前侧总覆盖范围(30.7%±8.5%,平片33.3%±8.2%,P < 0.0001)显著降低,后侧总覆盖范围(54.1%±6.9%,平片49.1%±7.8%,P < 0.0001)显著增加。透视还未能识别出30%的交叉征存在情况,并且低估了后倾指数(9%±16%,平片13%±16%,P = 0.016)。

结论

以髋关节为中心的透视所测定的LCE角和AI值与标准化AP平片摄影所获得的值无差异。然而,与标准化AP骨盆X线摄影相比,透视导致髋臼的前倾投影更多,前侧总覆盖范围显著降低,后侧总覆盖范围显著增加,并且后倾征象被低估。

临床意义

本研究显示LCE角和AI角可靠,但标准化AP骨盆X线摄影与以髋关节为中心的透视之间髋臼投影前倾存在显著差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索