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
. 2023 Feb 22;11(2):23259671221148502.
doi: 10.1177/23259671221148502. eCollection 2023 Feb.

Large Hip Impingement Area and Subspine Hip Impingement in Patients With Absolute Femoral Retroversion or Decreased Combined Version

Affiliations

Large Hip Impingement Area and Subspine Hip Impingement in Patients With Absolute Femoral Retroversion or Decreased Combined Version

Adam Boschung et al. Orthop J Sports Med. .

Abstract

Background: It remains unclear if femoral retroversion is a contraindication for hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

Purpose: To compare the area and location of hip impingement at maximal flexion and during the FADIR test (flexion, adduction, internal rotation) in FAI hips with femoral retroversion, hips with decreased combined version, and asymptomatic controls.

Study design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: Twenty-four symptomatic patients (37 hips) with anterior FAI were evaluated. All patients had femoral version (FV) <5° according to the Murphy method. Two subgroups were analyzed: 13 hips with absolute femoral retroversion (FV <0°) and 29 hips with decreased combined version (McKibbin index <20°). All patients were symptomatic and had anterior groin pain and a positive anterior impingement test ; all had undergone pelvic computed tomography (CT) scans to measure FV. The asymptomatic control group consisted of 26 hips. Dynamic impingement simulation of maximal flexion and FADIR test at 90° of flexion was performed with patient-specific CT-based 3-dimensional models. Extra- or intra-articular hip impingement area and location were compared between the subgroups and with control hips using nonparametric tests.

Results: Impingement area was significantly larger for hips with decreased combined version (<20°) versus combined version (≥20°) (mean ± SD; 171 ± 140 vs 78 ± 55 mm2; P = .012) and was significantly larger for hips with FV <0° (absolute femoral retroversion) vs FV >0° (P = .025). Hips with absolute femoral retroversion had a significantly higher frequency of extra-articular subspine impingement versus controls (92% vs 0%; P < .001), compared to 84% of patients with decreased combined version. Intra-articular femoral impingement location was most often (95%) anterosuperior and anterior (2-3 o'clock). Anteroinferior femoral impingement location was significantly different at maximal flexion (anteroinferior [4-5 o'clock]) versus the FADIR test (anterosuperior and anterior [2-3 o'clock]) (P < .001).

Conclusion: Patients with absolute femoral retroversion (FV <0°) had a larger hip impingement area, and most exhibited extra-articular subspine impingement. Preoperative FV assessment with advanced imaging (CT/magnetic resonance imaging) could help to identify these patients (without 3-dimensional modeling). Femoral impingement was located anteroinferiorly at maximal flexion and anterosuperiorly and anteriorly during the FADIR test.

Keywords: femoral retroversion; femoral version; femoroacetabular impingement; hip; hip arthroscopy; hip preservation surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: Funding for this study was provided from the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant P2BEP3_195241 to T.D.L.). AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
(A) A 3-dimensional model of the bilateral femur and (B, C) axial computed tomography images of the hip and posterior femoral condyle in a 26-year-old man with absolute femoral retroversion. (B) The femoral head center (white dot) was connected with the center of the femoral shaft on the level of the lesser trochanter to define the proximal landmarks. (C) The posterior condyles were connected with a line for the distal landmarks.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Determining the location of acetabular (top row) and femoral (bottom row) hip impingement during the FADIR test at 90° of flexion and 30° of internal rotation combined with (A)  0°, (B) 10°, and (C) 20° of adduction on computed tomography scans from a 23-year-old man with absolute femoral retroversion. The impingement area is outlined in red. FADIR, flexion, adduction, internal rotation.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Frequency of extra-articular subspine hip impingement for patients with absolute femoral retroversion during the FADIR test: 90° of flexion; 30° of internal rotation (IR); and 0°, 10°, or 20° of adduction. FADIR, flexion, adduction, internal rotation.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
A clockface system was used for intra-articular impingement location, where 1 to 2 o’clock represents anterosuperior, 4 to 5 o’clock represents anteroinferior, and 3 o’clock anterior (for left and right hips). The anterior femoral impingement location was significantly different at maximal flexion (anteroinferior; 4-5 o’clock) vs during the FADIR test (anterosuperior and anterior; 2-3 o’clock) (P < .001). FADIR, flexion, adduction, internal rotation.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Atkins PR, Fiorentino NM, Hartle JA, et al. In vivo pelvic and hip joint kinematics in patients with cam femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: a dual fluoroscopy study. J Orthop Res. 2020;38(4):823–833. doi:10.1002/jor.24509 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Atkins PR, Hananouchi T, Anderson AE, Aoki SK. Inclusion of the acetabular labrum reduces simulated range of motion of the hip compared with bone contact models. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2020;2(6):e779–e787. doi:10.1016/j.asmr.2020.07.014 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bedi A, Dolan M, Hetsroni I, et al. Surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement improves hip kinematics: a computer-assisted model. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(suppl):43S–49S. doi:10.1177/0363546511414635 - PubMed
    1. Bouma H, Hogervorst T, Audenaert E, van Kampen P. Combining femoral and acetabular parameters in femoroacetabular impingement: the omega surface. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2015;53(11):1239–1246. doi:10.1007/s11517-015-1392-6 - PubMed
    1. Breighner RE, Bogner EA, Lee SC, Koff MF, Potter HG. Evaluation of osseous morphology of the hip using zero echo time magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(14):3460–3468. doi:10.1177/0363546519878170 - PubMed