Abstract:The American Journal of Sports Medicine, Ahead of Print. Background:Spinopelvic parameters, including pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and pelvic incidence, have been developed to characterize the relationship between lumbar spine and hip motion, but a paucity of literature is available characterizing differences in spinopelvic parameters among patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) versus patients without FAIS, as well as the effect of these parameters on outcomes of arthroscopic treatment of FAIS.Purpose:To (1) identify differences in spinopelvic parameters between patients with FAIS versus controls without FAIS; (2) identify associations between spinopelvic parameters and preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs); and (3) identify differences in PROs between patients with stiff spines (standing-sitting ΔSS ≤10°) versus those without.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.Methods:The study enrolled patients ≥18 years of age who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for treatment of FAIS with cam, pincer, or mixed (cam and pincer) morphology. Participants underwent preoperative standing-sitting imaging with a low-dose 3-dimensional radiography system and were matched on age and body mass index (BMI) to controls without FAIS who also underwent EOS imaging. Spinopelvic parameters measured on EOS films were compared between the FAIS and control groups. Patients with FAIS completed the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS) before surgery and at 1-year follow-up. Outcome scores were compared between patients with stiff spines versus those without. Associations between spinopelvic parameters and baseline outcome scores were assessed with Pearson correlations. Continuous variables were compared with Student t test and/or Mann-Whitney U test, and categorical variables were compared with Fisher exact test.Results:A total of 50 patients with FAIS (26 men; 24 women; mean age, 36.1 ± 10.7 years; mean BMI, 25.6 ± 4.2) were matched to 30 controls without FAIS (13 men; 17 women; mean age, 36.6 ± 9.5 years; mean BMI, 26.7 ± 3.6). Age, sex, and BMI were not significantly different between the FAIS and control groups (P > .05). Standing PT was not significantly different between stiff and non-stiff cohorts (P = .73), but sitting PT in the FAIS group was more than double that of the control group (36.5° vs 15.0°; P < .001). Incidence of stiff spine was significantly higher in the FAIS group (62.0% vs 3.3%; P .05), but a greater sitting SS was found to be positively correlated with a higher baseline mHHS (r = 0.36; P = .02).Conclusion:Patients with FAIS were more likely to have a stiff spine (standing-sitting ΔSS ≤10°) compared with control participants without FAIS. FAIS patients with stiff spines were more likely to have isolated cam morphology than patient without stiff spines. Although sitting SS was positively correlated with baseline mHHS, no significant differences were seen in 1-year postoperative outcomes between FAIS patients with versus without stiff spine.

Decreased volume of rectus femoris and iliocapsularis in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome after primary hip arthroscopy

Volume of Gluteus Maximus and Minimus Increases After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Effect of Changes in Iliocapsularis Cross-sectional Area on Hip Arthroscopy Outcomes: Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Follow-up

Postoperative Effusion-Synovitis is Associated With Poor Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: a Consecutive Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study

The Presence of Central Acetabular Osteophytes May Negatively Affect the Outcome after Primary Arthroscopic Therapy of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Sex-Specific Differences in Hip Muscle Cross-sectional Area and Fatty Infiltration in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Ultrasound and Shear‐wave Elastography Characteristics of the Iliocapsularis Muscle in Pincer‐type Femoroacetabular Impingement

The Effect of Pelvic Incidence on Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement and Acetabular Labral Tears

Effect of Spinopelvic Parameters on Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Hip and Pelvis Movement Patterns in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Differ From Controls and Change After Hip Arthroscopy During a Step-Down Pivot-Turn Task

Intermediate-Term Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome in Patients With Global Versus Isolated Lateral Acetabular Overcoverage

Pre-Operative Gait Kinematics and Kinetics Do Not Change Following Surgery in Adolescent Patients with Femoroacetabular Impingement

Femoroacetabular impingement – What the rheumatologist needs to know

Squatting biomechanics following physiotherapist-led care or hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: a secondary analysis from a randomised controlled trial

Comparative analysis of hip arthroscopy and open surgical dislocation for treating femoroacetabular impingement

Conservative Therapy Versus Arthroscopic Surgery of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome (FAI): a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Arthroscopic Treatment for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome with External Snapping Hip: A Comparison Study of Matched Case Series

Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Shows Good Outcomes and Low Revision Rates, with Young Age and Low Postoperative Pain Score Predicting Excellent 5-Year Outcomes

Preliminary Study of Image Findings of Femoroacetabular Impingement

Outcomes after Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome in Chinese Patients: A Minimum 2-Year Follow-up Study

Correlation Between Improvement in Pain After Ultrasound-Guided Intra-articular Hip Injection and Outcomes After Arthroscopy in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement