Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the acetabular morphology of pincer impingement hips in order to better understand damage pattern in these patients. We compared MRI measurements made at different postions from anterior to posterior on the acetbulum in patients with pure pincer type FAI to those made in patients with pure cam-type to collect parameters that may be useful in the diagnosis and classification of pincer impingement.
Material and Methods
From an initial consecutive retrospective population of 1022 patients that underwent MRI with clinical impingement signs 78 hips which were selected with as clear cam (n=57) or pincer (n=21) impingement on plain radiographics. On these MR Imaging was performed with a 1.5-Tesla system. For analysis, a lateral angle of overcoverage on coronal MRI (MR_LCE), the MR extrusion index and the alpha angle (after Nötzli) were used. In addition to these the gamma angle, the acetabular depth and the angle of lateral acetabular overcoverage were described clock-wise on 7 radial slides from anterior to posterior. These were compared between the cam and pincer population using students-t-test. Measurements were obtained by two observers and inter-observer variability was assessed.
Results
The acetabular depth showed in all 7 positions significant smaller values for pincer-type in comparison to cam-type impingement. Highest difference was found is superior-posterior position. The acetabular angle is also significant smaller for pincer than for cam in all radial positions. Highest difference of the acetabular angle is located in superior (pincer −102.93°/cam 109.62°) and anterior-superior position (pincer 102.48°/cam 108.77 °). The gamma angle showed significant differences in all radial positions except anterior position. The highest difference is located in superior-posterior position (pincer 86.18 °/cam 08.77°). The mean MR extrusion index was significant lower for pincer type (12.73%) compared to cam-type patients (17.76%) (p=0.004).
LCE angle and extrusion index on MRI displayed a Person correlation coefficient of 0.920. The correlation of the acetabular depth and angle was 0.638.
Conclusion
There are several morphological differences between pincer and cam acetabuli: They are significantly deeper in all radial positions than cam hips. They tend to have greater retroversion and have smaller gamma angles. Our results suggest that the superior-posterior quadrant displays greater coverage in pincer hips than cam hips, and therefore damage to the labrum and cartilage surface may extend further into the posterior portion of the acetabulum in pincer hips than in cam hips.
