Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Apr;55(2):239-246.
doi: 10.1055/s-0039-3400516. Epub 2020 Jan 28.

Pelvic Bone Deformity and Its Correlation with Acetabular Center-edge Angle

Affiliations

Pelvic Bone Deformity and Its Correlation with Acetabular Center-edge Angle

Bruno Dutra Roos et al. Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2020 Apr.

Abstract

Objective The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the pelvic bone deformities and its correlation with the acetabular center-edge (CE) angle. Methods Between August 2014 and April 2015, we prospectively evaluated patients aged between 20 and 60 years old. The exclusion criteria were: metabolic disease, previous hip or spine surgery, radiograph showing hip arthrosis ≥ Tönnis two, severe hip dysplasia, global acetabular overcoverage, acetabular crossover sign, hip deformities from slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) or Leg-Perthes-Calveé, and bad quality radiographs. At anteroposterior (AP) pelvic radiographs, we have evaluated: the CE angle, the acetabular index (IA), the acetabular crossover sign, the vertical and horizontal superior and inferior pelvic axis (H1: Horizontal line 1, superior pelvic axis; H2: Horizontal line 2, superior pelvic axis; V1: Vertical line, superior pelvic axis; HR: Horizontal line, inferior pelvic axis; VR: Vertical line, inferior pelvic axis). The superior and inferior pelvic axis were considered asymmetric when there was a difference ≥ 5 mm between both sides. Patients were divided into two groups: control and group 1. Results A total of 228 patients (456 hips) were evaluated in the period. According to the established criteria, 93 patients were included. The mean age was 39.9 years old (20 to 60 years old, standard deviation [SD] = 10,5), and the mean CE angle in the right hip was 31.5° (20 o to 40°), and in the left 32.3° (20 o to 40°). The control group had 38 patients, with asymmetric H1 in 4 cases (10.5%), H2 in 5 (13.1%), V1 in 7 (18.4%), HR in 5 (13.1%) and VR in 1 (2.63%). Group 1 had 55 patients, with asymmetric H1 in 24 cases (43.6%), H2 in 50 (90.9%), V1 in 28 (50.9%), HR in 16 (29.09%) and VR in 8 (14.5%). Comparing both groups, there was statistical significance for H1, H2 and V1 asymmetry ( p < 0.001). Conclusion In the present paper, we observed the correlation between variation in the acetabular CE angle and asymmetry of the superior hemipelvis. The present authors believe that a better understanding of the pelvic morphologic alterations allows a greater facility in the diagnosis of hip articular deformities.

Keywords: acetabulum; femur head; hip dislocation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflito de Interesses Os autores declaram não haver conflito de interesses.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Exemplification of bilateral pelvic axis measurement method. All lines (H1, H2, V1, HR and VR) are referenced to the line between the teardrops. a) H1 and H2 correspond to the measurement of the horizontal axis of the upper hemipelvis. Initially, a line is defined connecting the upper points of the acetabular roofs (supra-acetabular line). H1 is 2cm above it; H2 is 7cm above it. b) V1 corresponds to the measurement of the vertical axis of the upper hemipelvis. It is the measurement from the highest point of the iliac bone to the supra-acetabular line. c) HR corresponds to the measurement of the horizontal axis of the lower hemipelvis, having as reference a midpoint of the pubic symphysis joint. d) VR corresponds to the measurement of the vertical axis of the lower hemipelvis, having as reference a midpoint of the measurement of the HR.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Case example of group 1. a) Asymmetry of the measurements of the horizontal axis of the upper hemipelvis (H1 and H2) is evinced. b) Asymmetry of the vertical axis measurement of the upper hemipelvis (V1) is evdenced. c) Symmetry of the measurements of the horizontal and vertical axes of the lower hemipelves (HR e VR) is evinced.
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Exemplificação do método de aferição dos eixos pélvicos bilateralmente. Todas as linhas (H1, H2, V1, HR e VR) têm como referência a linha entre as gotas de lágrima. a) H1 e H2 correspondem à aferição do eixo horizontal da hemipelve superior. Inicialmente é definida uma linha ligando os pontos mais superiores dos tetos acetabulares (linha supra-acetabular). H1 localiza-se 2 cm acima desta; H2 localiza-se 7 cm acima desta. b) V1 corresponde à aferição do eixo vertical da hemipelve superior. É a medida do ponto mais superior do osso ilíaco até a linha supra-acetabular. c) HR corresponde à aferição do eixo horizontal da hemipelve inferior, tendo como referência um ponto médio da articulação da sínfise púbica. d) VR corresponde à aferição do eixo vertical da hemipelve inferior, tendo como referência um ponto médio da aferição HR.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Exemplificação de caso do grupo 1. a) Evidencia-se assimetria das aferições do eixo horizontal da hemipelve superior (H1 e H2). b) Evidencia-se assimetria da aferição do eixo vertical da hemipelve superior (V1). c) Evidencia-se simetria das aferições dos eixos horizontal e vertical da hemipelve inferior (HR e VR).

References

    1. Gosvig K K, Jacobsen S, Sonne-Holm S, Palm H, Troelsen A. Prevalence of malformations of the hip joint and their relationship to sex, groin pain, and risk of osteoarthritis: a population-based survey. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(05):1162–1169. - PubMed
    1. Agricola R, Heijboer M P, Roze R H et al.Pincer deformity does not lead to osteoarthritis of the hip whereas acetabular dysplasia does: acetabular coverage and development of osteoarthritis in a nationwide prospective cohort study (CHECK) Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21(10):1514–1521. - PubMed
    1. Reynolds D, Lucas J, Klaue K. Retroversion of the acetabulum. A cause of hip pain. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999;81(02):281–288. - PubMed
    1. Cooperman D. What is the evidence to support acetabular dysplasia as a cause of osteoarthritis? J Pediatr Orthop. 2013;33 01:S2–S7. - PubMed
    1. Tannast M, Siebenrock K A, Anderson S E. Femoroacetabular impingement: radiographic diagnosis--what the radiologist should know. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(06):1540–1552. - PubMed