Abstract:Background: It remains unclear whether decreased femoral version (FV) causes anterior intra- or extra-articular femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Therefore, we evaluated symptomatic hips with decreased FV, with and without cam and pincer FAI, by using computed tomography (CT)-based virtual 3-dimensional (3D) impingement simulation and compared this group with patients with normal FV and with asymptomatic hips. Purpose: To investigate (1) the osseous range of motion, (2) the osseous femoral and acetabular impingement zones, and (3) whether hip impingement is extra- or intra-articular in symptomatic hips with FAI. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: An institutional review board-approved, retrospective comparative analysis was performed on a total of 84 hips in 68 participants. Of these, 37 hips in 24 symptomatic patients with FAI had decreased FV. These hips were compared with 21 hips of 18 symptomatic patients with anterior FAI with normal FV (10 degrees-25 degrees) and 26 asymptomatic hips with no FAI and normal FV. All patients with FAI were symptomatic and had anterior hip pain and a positive anterior impingement test. They underwent pelvic CT scans to measure FV. Decreased FV was defined as FV less than 5 degrees. The 37 hips with decreased FV presented both with and without cam and pincer FAI. All 84 hips were evaluated by use of CT-based 3D models and a validated 3D range of motion and impingement simulation. Asymptomatic hips were contralateral normal hips imaged in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Results: Hips with FAI combined with decreased FV had a significantly (P < .001) lower mean flexion (114 degrees +/- 8 degrees vs 125 degrees +/- 13 degrees) and internal rotation (IR) at 90 degrees of flexion (18 degrees +/- 6 degrees vs 32 degrees +/- 9 degrees, P < .001) compared with the asymptomatic control group. Symptomatic patients with FAI and normal FV had flexion of 120 degrees +/- 16 degrees and IR at 90 degrees of flexion of 23 degrees +/- 15 degrees. In a subgroup analysis, we found a significantly (P < .001) lower IR in 90 degrees of flexion in hips with FV less than 5 degrees combined with mixed-type FAI compared with hips with FV less than 5 degrees without a cam- or pincer-type deformity. The maximal acetabular impingement zone for hips with decreased FV was located at the 2-o'clock position and ranged from 1 to 3 o'clock. In hips with decreased FV, most of the impingement locations were intra-articular but 32% of hips had combined intra- and extra-articular FAI in internal rotation in 90 degrees of flexion. During the flexion-adduction-IR test performed in 10 degrees and 20 degrees of adduction, extra-articular subspine FAI had significantly (P < .001) higher prevalence (68% and 84%) in hips with decreased FV compared with normal hips. Conclusion: Hips with FAI and decreased FV had less flexion and internal rotation in 90 degrees of flexion compared with the asymptomatic control group. The majority of hip impingement due to low FV was intra-articular, but one-third of samples had combined intra- and extra-articular subspine FAI. Anterior extra- and intra-articular hip impingement can be present in patients who have FAI with decreased FV. This could be important for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy.

Acetabular Impingement Management Including Focal and Global Retroversion and the Subspine

Femoroacetabular impingement – What the rheumatologist needs to know

Femoroacetabular Impingement and Acetabular Labral Tears - Part 3: Surgical Treatment

Anterior inferior iliac spine and subspine impingement syndrome

Evaluation of additional causes of hip pain in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome

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

Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome with Bone Cyst at Femoral Head-Neck Junction: Case Report and Literature Review

Cam-Type Impingement: Ensuring an Ideal Femoroplasty

Capsular Repair, Labral Repair, and Femoroplasty are Increasing for the Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement

Outcomes in Patients with Global Pincer Versus Focal Pincer Femoroacetabular Impingement Treated with Hip Arthroscopy: A Retrospective Study with a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up

Relationship between Spinopelvic Parameters and Hip Function in Patients with Femoroacetabular Impingement at Diagnosis: A Cross-Sectional Study

Preliminary Study of Image Findings of Femoroacetabular Impingement

Arthroscopic Capsular Suture-Lifting Technique for Treating Femoroacetabular Impingement Patients with a High Risk of Postoperative Anterior Instability

Pre- and intraoperative decision-making challenges in hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement

Relationship Between the Depth of Acetabuloplasty and Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy in Patients with Global Pincer Femoroacetabular Impingement: Study with a Minimum Follow-Up Period of 2 Years.

Lateral center-edge angle in femoroacetabular impingement: from the sourcil or the rim of the acetabulum?

Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement: Proceed with Caution

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

Editorial Commentary: Indications for Concurrent Procedures During Hip Femoroacetabular Impingement Arthroscopic Treatment

Clinical Outcomes of the Arthroscopic Capsular Suture-Lifting Technique in the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Patients With Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip

Femoroacetabular Impingement Patients With Decreased Femoral Version Have Different Impingement Locations and Intra- and Extraarticular Anterior Subspine FAI on 3D-CT-Based Impingement Simulation: Implications for Hip Arthroscopy.