Vesey Renuka M, MacDonald Andrew A, Brick Matthew J, Bacon Catherine J, Foo Gen Lin, Lu Man, Lightfoot Nicholas, Blankenbaker Donna G, Woodward Rebecca M
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Department of Radiology, North Shore Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand.
Skeletal Radiol. 2025 May;54(5):1031-1041. doi: 10.1007/s00256-024-04802-4. Epub 2024 Oct 5.
Hip microinstability is a clinical entity increasingly recognized and treated but challenging to diagnose with a lack of objective criteria. This study assessed the prevalence and diagnostic accuracy of different imaging findings for hip microinstability on radiograph and MR.
A retrospective case-control study of 224 hips treated with arthroscopic surgery by a single orthopedic surgeon, 112 hips with clinical microinstability and 112 controls without. Pre-operative radiograph and MRI/MRA imaging were evaluated by two musculoskeletal radiologists to assess morphological parameters and imaging signs reportedly associated with hip microinstability.
Four imaging features reached significance as predictors of microinstability via three-step logistic regression: labral hyperplasia and decreased lateral center edge angle on MR (OR 2.45 and 0.93, respectively) and the absence of positive ischial spine sign and absence of osteophytes on radiographs (OR 0.47 and 0.28, respectively). Increased acetabular anteversion and absence of cam lesions were more likely in the microinstability group (p = 0.02 and 0.04, respectively), but not independent predictors. Labral tears, chondral loss, abnormal ligamentum teres, anterior capsule thinning, iliocapsularis to rectus femoris ratio, posterior crescent sign, cliff sign, and femoro-epiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index were not associated with microinstabillity.
Imaging features may be predictive of hip microinstability in some cases. Decreased LCEA, increased acetabular anteversion, and labral hyperplasia were associated with microinstability in this study, while many other published imaging findings were not. Imaging remains complementary, but not definitive, in the diagnosis of hip microinstability.
髋关节微不稳定是一种越来越被认识和治疗的临床实体,但由于缺乏客观标准,诊断具有挑战性。本研究评估了X线片和磁共振成像(MR)上不同影像学表现对髋关节微不稳定的患病率和诊断准确性。
对一位骨科医生进行关节镜手术治疗的224例髋关节进行回顾性病例对照研究,其中112例有临床微不稳定,112例为对照。两名肌肉骨骼放射科医生对术前X线片和MRI/MRA成像进行评估,以评估据报道与髋关节微不稳定相关的形态学参数和影像学征象。
通过三步逻辑回归分析,有四个影像学特征作为微不稳定的预测指标具有统计学意义:MR上的盂唇增生和外侧中心边缘角减小(比值比分别为2.45和0.93),以及X线片上坐骨棘征阴性和无骨赘(比值比分别为0.47和0.28)。髋臼前倾角增加和无凸轮病变在微不稳定组中更常见(p分别为0.02和0.04),但不是独立的预测指标。盂唇撕裂、软骨损伤、圆韧带异常、前囊变薄、髂腰肌腱与股直肌比值、后新月征、悬崖征和股骨骨骺髋臼顶(FEAR)指数与微不稳定无关。
在某些情况下,影像学特征可能预测髋关节微不稳定。本研究中,外侧中心边缘角减小、髋臼前倾角增加和盂唇增生与微不稳定相关,而许多其他已发表的影像学表现则无关。影像学在髋关节微不稳定的诊断中仍然是辅助手段,而非决定性手段。