Aims. Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is an established treatment for acetabular dysplasia. It has also been proposed as a treatment for patients with acetabular retroversion. By reviewing a large cohort, we aimed to test whether outcome is equivalent for both types of morphology and identify factors that influenced outcome. Methods. A single-centre, retrospective cohort study was performed on patients with acetabular retroversion treated with PAO (n = 62 hips). Acetabular retroversion was diagnosed clinically and radiologically (presence of a crossover sign, posterior wall sign, lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) between 20° and 35°). Outcomes were compared with a control group of patients undergoing PAO for dysplasia (LCEA < 20°; n = 86 hips). Femoral version was recorded. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, and reoperation rates were measured. Results. The mean Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS) preoperatively was 58.6 (SD 16.1) for the dysplastic hips and 52.5 (SD 12.7) for the retroverted hips (p = 0.145). Postoperatively, mean NAHS was 83.0 (SD 16.9) and 76.7 (SD 17.9) for dysplastic and retroverted hips respectively (p = 0.041). Difference between pre- and postoperative NAHS was slightly lower in the retroverted hips (18.3 (SD 22.1)) compared to the dysplastic hips (25.2 (SD 15.2); p = 0.230). At mean 3.5 years’ follow-up (SD 1.9), one hip needed a revision PAO and no hips were converted to total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the retroversion group. In the control group, six hips (7.0%) were revised to THA. No differences in complications (p = 0.106) or in reoperation rate (p = 0.087) were seen. Negative predictors of outcome for patients undergoing surgery for retroversion were female sex, obesity, hypermobility, and severely decreased femoral anteversion. Conclusion. A PAO is an effective surgical intervention for acetabular retroversion and produces similar improvements when used to treat dysplasia. Femoral version should be routinely assessed in these patients and when extremely low (< 0°), as an additional procedure to address this abnormality may be necessary. Females with signs of hypermobility should also be consulted of the likely guarded improvement. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):757–764

Aims. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether acetabular retroversion (AR) represents a structural anatomical abnormality of the pelvis or is a functional phenomenon of pelvic positioning in the sagittal plane, and to what extent the changes that result from patient-specific functional position affect the extent of AR. Methods. A comparative radiological study of 19 patients (38 hips) with AR were compared with a control group of 30 asymptomatic patients (60 hips). CT scans were corrected for rotation in the axial and coronal planes, and the sagittal plane was then aligned to the anterior pelvic plane. External rotation of the hemipelvis was assessed using the superior iliac wing and inferior iliac wing angles as well as quadrilateral plate angles, and correlated with cranial and central acetabular version. Sagittal anatomical parameters were also measured and correlated to version measurements. In 12 AR patients (24 hips), the axial measurements were repeated after matching sagittal pelvic rotation with standing and supine anteroposterior radiographs. Results. Acetabular version was significantly lower and measurements of external rotation of the hemipelvis were significantly increased in the AR group compared to the control group. The AR group also had increased evidence of anterior projection of the iliac wing in the sagittal plane. The acetabular orientation angles were more retroverted in the supine compared to standing position, and the change in acetabular version correlated with the change in sagittal pelvic tilt. An anterior pelvic tilt of 1° correlated with 1.02° of increased cranial retroversion and 0.76° of increased central retroversion. Conclusion. This study has demonstrated that patients with symptomatic AR have both an externally rotated hemipelvis and increased anterior projection of the iliac wing compared to a control group of asymptomatic patients. Functional sagittal pelvic positioning was also found to affect AR in symptomatic patients: the acetabulum was more retroverted in the supine position compared to standing position. Changes in acetabular version correlate with the change in sagittal pelvic tilt. These findings should be taken into account by surgeons when planning acetabular correction for AR with periacetabular osteotomy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):128–135

Aims. Acetabular retroversion is a recognized cause of hip impingement and can be influenced by pelvic tilt (PT), which changes in different functional positions. Positional changes in PT have not previously been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion. Methods. Supine and standing anteroposterior (AP) pelvic radiographs were retrospectively analyzed in 69 patients treated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion. Measurements were made for acetabular index (AI), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), crossover index, ischial spine sign, and posterior wall sign. The change in the angle of PT was measured both by the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle and the pubic symphysis to sacroiliac (PS-SI) index. Results. In the supine position, the mean PT (by SFP) was 1.05° (SD 3.77°), which changed on standing to a PT of 8.64° (SD 5.34°). A significant increase in posterior PT from supine to standing of 7.59° (SD 4.5°; SFP angle) and 5.89° (SD 3.33°; PS-SI index) was calculated (p < 0.001). There was a good correlation in PT change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (0.901 in the preoperative group and 0.815 in the postoperative group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing radiographs compared to supine: crossover index (0.16 (SD 0.16) vs 0.38 (SD 0.15); p < 0.001), crossover sign (19/28 hips vs 28/28 hips; p < 0.001), ischial spine sign (10/28 hips vs 26/28 hips; p < 0.001), and posterior wall sign (12/28 hips vs 24/28 hips; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Posterior PT increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion. The features of acetabular retroversion were less evident on standing radiographs. The low PT angle in the supine position is a factor in the increased appearance of acetabular retroversion. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs to highlight signs of acetabular retroversion, and to assist with optimizing acetabular correction at the time of surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):786–791

Aims. The frequency of severe femoral retroversion is unclear in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). This study aimed to investigate mean femoral version (FV), the frequency of absolute femoral retroversion, and the combination of decreased FV and acetabular retroversion (AR) in symptomatic patients with FAI subtypes. Methods. A retrospective institutional review board-approved observational study was performed with 333 symptomatic patients (384 hips) with hip pain due to FAI evaluated for hip preservation surgery. Overall, 142 patients (165 hips) had cam-type FAI, while 118 patients (137 hips) had mixed-type FAI. The allocation to each subgroup was based on reference values calculated on anteroposterior radiographs. CT/MRI-based measurement of FV (Murphy method) and AV were retrospectively compared among five FAI subgroups. Frequency of decreased FV < 10°, severely decreased FV < 5°, and absolute femoral retroversion (FV < 0°) was analyzed. Results. A significantly (p < 0.001) lower mean FV was found in patients with cam-type FAI (15° (SD 10°)), and in patients with mixed-type FAI (17° (SD 11°)) compared to severe over-coverage (20° (SD 12°). Frequency of decreased FV < 10° was significantly (p < 0.001) higher in patients with cam-type FAI (28%, 46 hips) and in patients with over-coverage (29%, 11 hips) compared to severe over-coverage (12%, 5 hips). Absolute femoral retroversion (FV < 0°) was found in 13% (5 hips) of patients with over-coverage, 6% (10 hips) of patients with cam-type FAI, and 5% (7 hips) of patients with mixed-type FAI. The frequency of decreased FV< 10° combined with acetabular retroversion (AV < 10°) was 6% (8 hips) in patients with mixed-type FAI and 5% (20 hips) in all FAI patients. Of patients with over-coverage, 11% (4 hips) had decreased FV < 10° combined with acetabular retroversion (AV < 10°). Conclusion. Patients with cam-type FAI had a considerable proportion (28%) of decreased FV < 10° and 6% had absolute femoral retroversion (FV < 0°), even more for patients with pincer-type FAI due to over-coverage (29% and 13%). This could be important for patients evaluated for open hip preservation surgery or hip arthroscopy, and each patient requires careful personalized evaluation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):557–565

Acetabular retroversion is a recognised cause of hip impingement. Pelvic tilt influences acetabular orientation and is known to change in different functional positions. While previously reported in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip, positional changes in pelvic tilt have not been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion. We retrospectively analysed supine and standing AP pelvic radiographs in 22 patients with preoperative radiographs and 47 with post-operative radiographs treated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion. Measurements were made for acetabular index (AI), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), crossover index, ischial spine sign, and posterior wall sign. The change in pelvic tilt angle was measured both by the Sacro-Femoral-Pubic (SFP) angle and the Pubic Symphysis to Sacro-iliac (PS-SI) Index. In the supine position, the mean calculated pelvic tilt angle (by SFP) was 1.05° which changed on standing to a pelvic tilt of 8.64°. A significant increase in posterior pelvic tilt angle from supine to standing of 7.59° (SFP angle) and 5.89° (PS –SI index) was calculated (p<0.001;paired t-test). There was a good correlation in pelvic tilt change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (rho .901 in pre-op group, rho .815 in post-op group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing x-rays compared to supine: Crossover index (0.16 vs 0.38; p<0.001) crossover sign (19/28 vs 28/28 hips; p<0.001), ischial spine sign (10/28 hips vs 26/28 hips; p<0.001) and posterior wall sign (12/28 vs 24/28 hips; p<0.001). Posterior pelvic tilt increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion, in keeping with previous studies of pelvic tilt change in patients with hip dysplasia. The features of acetabular retroversion were much less evident on standing radiographs. The low pelvic tilt angle in the supine position is implicated in the appearance of acetabular retroversion in the supine position. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs so as not to miss signs of retroversion and to assist with optimising acetabular correction at the time of surgery

Acetabular retroversion is a recognised cause of hip impingement. Pelvic tilt influences acetabular orientation and is known to change in different functional positions. While previously reported in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip, positional changes in pelvic tilt have not been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion. We retrospectively analysed supine and standing AP pelvic radiographs in 22 patients with preoperative radiographs and 47 with post-operative radiographs treated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion. Measurements were made for acetabular index (AI), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), crossover index, ischial spine sign, and posterior wall sign. The change in pelvic tilt angle was measured both by the Sacro-Femoral-Pubic (SFP) angle and the Pubic Symphysis to Sacro-iliac (PS-SI) Index. In the supine position, the mean calculated pelvic tilt angle (by SFP) was 1.05° which changed on standing to a pelvic tilt of 8.64°. A significant increase in posterior pelvic tilt angle from supine to standing of 7.59° (SFP angle) and 5.89° (PS –SI index) was calculated (p<0.001;paired t-test). The mean pelvic tilt change of 6.51° measured on post-operative Xrays was not significantly different (p=.650). There was a good correlation in pelvic tilt change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (rho .901 in pre-op group, rho .815 in post-op group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing x-rays compared to supine: Crossover index (0.16 vs 0.38; p<0.001) crossover sign (19/28 vs 28/28 hips; p<0.001), ischial spine sign (10/28 hips vs 26/28 hips; p<0.001) and posterior wall sign (12/28 vs 24/28 hips; p<0.001). Posterior pelvic tilt increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion, in keeping with previous studies of pelvic tilt change in patients with hip dysplasia. The features of acetabular retroversion were much less evident on standing radiographs. The low pelvic tilt angle in the supine position is implicated in the appearance of acetabular retroversion in the supine position. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs so as not to miss signs of retroversion and to assist with optimising acetabular correction at the time of surgery

Acetabular retroversion (ARV) is a cause of femoroacetabular impingement leading to hip pain and reduced range of motion. We aimed to describe the radiological criteria used for diagnosing ARV in the literature and report on the outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) and hip arthroscopy (HA) in its management. A systematic review using PRISMA guidelines was conducted on the MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, COCHRANE database in December 2022. English-language studies reporting outcomes of PAO, or open or arthroscopic interventions for ARV were included. From an initial 4203 studies, 21 non-randomised studies met the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies evaluated HA for ARV, with average follow-up ranging from 1 to 5 years, for a cumulative number of 996 patients. Only 3/11 studies identified ARV using AP standardized pelvic radiographs. The most frequent signs describing ARV identified were: Ischial Spine Sign (98% of patients), Posterior Wall Sign (PWS, 94%) and Crossover Sign (COS, 64%); with mean Acetabular Retroversion Index (ARI) ranging from 33% to 35%. 39% of HA patients had all three radiographic signs. Clinically significant outcomes were reached by 33–78% of patients. Eight studies evaluated PAO for ARV, with a follow-up ranging from 2 to 10 years, for a cumulative number of 379 patients. Five of the eight studies identified ARV using standardized radiographs. ISS, COS and PWS were positive in 54%, 97% and 81% of patients, respectively with 52% of PAO patients having all three radiographic signs. Mean ARI ranged from 36–41%. Clinically significant results were reported in 71%–78% of patients. The diagnostic criteria for ARV is poorly defined in the literature, and the quality of evidence is low. Studies on HA are more likely to have used lenient diagnostic criteria. It remains difficult to recommend which cases maybe more suitable for treatment by HA rather than PAO

Aims. Hip arthroscopy has gained prominence as a primary surgical intervention for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). This study aimed to identify radiological features, and their combinations, that predict the outcome of hip arthroscopy for FAI. Methods. A prognostic cross-sectional cohort study was conducted involving patients from a single centre who underwent hip arthroscopy between January 2013 and April 2021. Radiological metrics measured on conventional radiographs and magnetic resonance arthrography were systematically assessed. The study analyzed the relationship between these metrics and complication rates, revision rates, and patient-reported outcomes. Results. Out of 810 identified hip arthroscopies, 359 hips were included in the study. Radiological risk factors associated with unsatisfactory outcomes after cam resection included a dysplastic posterior wall, Tönnis grade 2 or higher, and over-correction of the α angle. The presence of acetabular retroversion and dysplasia were also significant predictors for worse surgical outcomes. Notably, over-correction of both cam and pincer deformities resulted in poorer outcomes than under-correction. Conclusion. We recommend caution in performing hip arthroscopy in patients who have three positive acetabular retroversion signs. Acetabular dysplasia with a lateral centre-edge angle of less than 20° should not be treated with isolated hip arthroscopy. Acetabular rim-trimming should be avoided in patients with borderline dysplasia, and care should be taken to avoid over-correction of a cam deformity and/or pincer deformity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(8):775–782

Introduction. Peri-acetabular-osteotomy (PAO) was initially described for the correction of acetabular dysplasia. Anteverting PAO is an established treatment for acetabular retroversion. By reviewing a large cohort, we aimed to (1) Test whether PAO outcome is equivalent in different types of deformity (classic dysplasia vs. retroversion) and (2) Determine whether outcome in acetabular retroversion is different between impinging-only hip and hips with combined pathology (impingement & dysplasia). Methods. A single-centre, retrospective cohort study was performed on a group of patients (n=183) with acetabular retroversion (n=90) or lateral-under-coverage dysplasia (n=93) treated with PAO. Acetabular deformity was defined on pelvic radiographs and 3-D CTs using a number of parameters. Hips with retroversion, were sub-divided into combined pathology - retroversion with dysplasia (lateral centre-edge [LCEA] < 25°), or retroversion-only (LCEA≥25°). The mean age at time of the procedure was 29+/−7 years and most hips were in females (n=171). Complication (as per Dindo-Clavien)-, re-operation-, hip preservation rates and patient-reported-outcome measures were measured using the Non-Arthroplasty-Hip-Score (NAHS). Results. At 2±1 years of follow-up, 5 hips underwent THA (2 dysplastics; 3 retroversion). Major complication rate was 2% for dysplastics and 5% for retroversions (p=0.9). Similar re-operation rates were seen (4% Vs. 8%, p=0.1). Better NAHS was seen in dysplastics compared to retroversions post-operatively (83Vs.73; p=0.001) but not pre-operatively (59 vs 57; p=0.2). ΔNAHS was inferior in retroversions (25 Vs.16, p=0.02). No difference in complications (p=0.1), re-operations (p=0.4) nor post-operative NAHS (76Vs71; p=0.3) were identified between retroversion-only and retroversion-combined pathology cases. Conclusion. A PAO is as safe for retroversion as it is for dysplasia. This is the case for retroverted acetabulae showing either features of combined pathology or impingement-only. However, the pre-operative NAHS was inferior in retroversion and the improvement was not as great as dysplastic hips, illustarting that the impingement process has a detrimental effect on outcome

Aims. Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) patients report exacerbation of hip pain in deep flexion. However, the exact impingement location in deep flexion is unknown. The aim was to investigate impingement-free maximal flexion, impingement location, and if cam deformity causes hip impingement in flexion in FAI patients. Methods. A retrospective study involving 24 patients (37 hips) with FAI and femoral retroversion (femoral version (FV) < 5° per Murphy method) was performed. All patients were symptomatic (mean age 28 years (SD 9)) and had anterior hip/groin pain and a positive anterior impingement test. Cam- and pincer-type subgroups were analyzed. Patients were compared to an asymptomatic control group (26 hips). All patients underwent pelvic CT scans to generate personalized CT-based 3D models and validated software for patient-specific impingement simulation (equidistant method). Results. Mean impingement-free flexion of patients with mixed-type FAI (110° (SD 8°)) and patients with pincer-type FAI (112° (SD 8°)) was significantly (p < 0.001) lower compared to the control group (125° (SD 13°)). The frequency of extra-articular subspine impingement was significantly (p < 0.001) increased in patients with pincer-type FAI (57%) compared to cam-type FAI (22%) in 125° flexion. Bony impingement in maximal flexion was located anterior-inferior at femoral four and five o’clock position in patients with cam-type FAI (63% (10 of 16 hips) and 37% (6 of 10 hips)), and did not involve the cam deformity. The cam deformity did not cause impingement in maximal flexion. Conclusion. Femoral impingement in maximal flexion was located anterior-inferior distal to the cam deformity. This differs to previous studies, a finding which could be important for FAI patients in order to avoid exacerbation of hip pain in deep flexion (e.g. during squats) and for hip arthroscopy (hip-preservation surgery) for planning of bone resection. Hip impingement in flexion has implications for daily activities (e.g. putting on shoes), sports, and sex. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(1):22–32

Orthopaedic surgeons have accepted various radiological signs to be representative of acetabular retroversion, which is the main characteristic of focal over-coverage in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Using a validated method for radiological analysis, we assessed the relevance of these signs to predict intra-articular lesions in 93 patients undergoing surgery for FAI. A logistic regression model to predict chondral damage showed that an acetabular retroversion index (ARI) > 20%, a derivative of the well-known cross-over sign, was an independent predictor (p = 0.036). However, ARI was less significant than the Tönnis classification (p = 0.019) and age (p = 0.031) in the same model. ARI was unable to discriminate between grades of chondral lesions, while the type of cam lesion (p = 0.004) and age (p = 0.047) were able to. Other widely recognised signs of acetabular retroversion, such as the ischial spine sign, the posterior wall sign or the cross-over sign were irrelevant according to our analysis. Regardless of its secondary predictive role, an ARI > 20% appears to be the most clinically relevant radiological sign of acetabular retroversion in symptomatic patients with FAI. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:893–9

This study examined the relationship between the cross-over sign and the true three-dimensional anatomical version of the acetabulum. We also investigated whether in true retroversion there is excessive femoral head cover anteriorly. Radiographs of 64 hips in patients being investigated for symptoms of femoro-acetabular impingement were analysed and the presence of a cross-over sign was documented. CT scans of the same hips were analysed to determine anatomical version and femoral head cover in relation to the anterior pelvic plane after correcting for pelvic tilt. The sensitivity and specificity of the cross-over sign were 92% and 55%, respectively for identifying true acetabular retroversion. There was no significant difference in total cover between normal and retroverted cases. Anterior and posterior cover were, however, significantly different (p < 0.001 and 0.002). The cross-over sign was found to be sensitive but not specific. The results for femoral head cover suggest that retroversion is characterised by posterior deficiency but increased cover anteriorly

Excessive acetabular cover secondary to a retroverted acetabulum causes pincer impingement, which may cause early osteoarthritis of the hip. Our aim was to determine if there was a relationship between acetabular version and osteoarthritis of the hip. Using image processing and analysis software we studied 117 CT images of the hip in patients aged less than 65 years who had undergone a CT virtual colonoscopy. The mean CT joint space of the 18 hips with acetabular retroversion was narrower compared with the 99 hips with normal acetabular alignment (p < 0.0001). A correlation of r = 0.46 (p < 0.01) was found between right hip acetabular version and the mean right hip joint space and of r = 0.31 (p = 0.02) between left hip acetabular version and the mean left hip joint space. Acetabular retroversion is associated with radiological evidence of osteoarthritis of the hip. An understanding of the mechanical basis of osteoarthritis of the hip allows early treatment of the underlying structural abnormality and prevents progression of the degenerative condition

Aims. The effect of pelvic tilt (PT) and sagittal balance in hips with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with acetabular retroversion (AR) is controversial. It is unclear if patients with AR have a rotational abnormality of the iliac wing. Therefore, we asked: are parameters for sagittal balance, and is rotation of the iliac wing, different in patients with AR compared to a control group?; and is there a correlation between iliac rotation and acetabular version?. Methods. A retrospective, review board-approved, controlled study was performed including 120 hips in 86 consecutive patients with symptomatic FAI or hip dysplasia. Pelvic CT scans were reviewed to calculate parameters for sagittal balance (pelvic incidence (PI), PT, and sacral slope), anterior pelvic plane angle, pelvic inclination, and external rotation of the iliac wing and were compared to a control group (48 hips). The 120 hips were allocated to the following groups: AR (41 hips), hip dysplasia (47 hips) and cam FAI with normal acetabular morphology (32 hips). Subgroups of total AR (15 hips) and high acetabular anteversion (20 hips) were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction. Results. PI and PT were significantly decreased comparing AR (PI 42° (SD 10°), PT 4° (SD 5°)) with dysplastic hips (PI 55° (SD 12°), PT 10° (SD 6°)) and with the control group (PI 51° (SD 9°) and PT 13° (SD 7°)) (p < 0.001). External rotation of the iliac wing was significantly increased comparing AR (29° (SD 4°)) with dysplastic hips (20°(SD 5°)) and with the control group (25° (SD 5°)) (p < 0.001). Correlation between external rotation of the iliac wing and acetabular version was significant and strong (r = 0.81; p < 0.001). Correlation between PT and acetabular version was significant and moderate (r = 0.58; p < 0.001). Conclusion. These findings could contribute to a better understanding of hip pain in a sitting position and extra-articular subspine FAI of patients with AR. These patients have increased iliac external rotation, a rotational abnormality of the iliac wing. This has implications for surgical therapy with hip arthroscopy and acetabular rim trimming or anteverting periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):813–824

We describe a little-known variety of hip dysplasia, termed ‘acetabular retroversion’, in which the alignment of the mouth of the acetabulum does not face the normal anterolateral direction, but inclines more posterolaterally. The condition may be part of a complex dysplasia or a single entity. Other than its retroversion, the acetabulum is sited normally on the side wall of the pelvis, and its articular surface is of normal extent and configuration. The retroverted orientation may give rise to problems of impingement between the femoral neck and anterior acetabular edge. We define the clinical and radiological parameters and discuss pathological changes which may occur in the untreated condition. A technique of management is proposed

Introduction. Acetabular retroversion (AR) can cause pain and early osteoarthritis. The sagittal pelvic position or pelvic tilt (PT)has a direct relationship with acetabular orientation. As the pelvis tilts anteriorly, PT reduces and AR increases. Therefore, AR may be a deformity secondary to abnormal PT (functional retroversion) or an anatomical deformity of the acetabulum and/or pelvic ring. This study aims to:. Define PT at presentation is in AR patients and whether this is different to controls (volunteers without pain). Assess whether the PT changes following a anteverting periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Methods. PT was measured for 51 patients who underwent a successful PAO. Mean age at PAO was 29±6 years and 48 were females. PT, pelvic incidence (PI), anterior pelvic plane (APP), and sacral slope (SS) were measured from CT data in 23 patients and compared to 44 (32±7 years old, 4 females) asymptomatic volunteers. Change in pelvic tilt in all 51 patients was measured using the Sacro-Femoral-Pubic angle (SFP), a validated method, from pre- and post-operative radiographs at a mean interval of 2.5(±2) years. Results. In the AR group lateral centre edge angle changed from 30° (SD 8°) to 36° (SD 6°) and sourcil angle changed from 4° (±7°) to −1° (±7°). The cross over sign was present in 96.2% (49/51) pre-PAO (cross-over ratio: 0.42); it remained in 9 hips (17.6%) post-PAO but the crossover ratio reduced (0.16). Mean PT in the asymptomatic group was 5° (SD 6°) and the same as the symptomatic group (4±4, p=0.256). However, in the symptomatic group, SS (38°(±9°)), APP (11°(±7°)) and PI (42° (±9°)) were different to the asymptomatic group (45° (SD 7°), p=0.002, 7° (±7°), p=0.021, and 50° (±9°), p=0.001 respectively). The pelvic tilt pre-operatively was 3° (±4°) remained unchanged post-operatively (4°±4°, p=0.676). Discussion. PT is not different in patients with symptomatic AR undergoing PAO when compared to a group of asymptomatic controls, nor does it change following PAO. This argues against the theory that AR is caused by abnormal PT. However, PI, SS and the APP are different suggesting that AR is a true morphological abnormality of the pelvis

Aims

The aim of the current study was to assess the reliability of the Ottawa classification for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia.

Aims. The primary aim of this trial was to compare the subsidence of two similar hydroxyapatite-coated titanium femoral components from different manufacturers. Secondary aims were to compare rotational migration (anteversion/retroversion and varus/valgus tilt) and patient-reported outcome measures between both femoral components. Methods. Patients were randomized to receive one of the two femoral components (Avenir or Corail) during their primary total hip arthroplasty between August 2018 and September 2020. Radiostereometric analysis examinations at six, 12, and 24 months were used to assess the migration of each implanted femoral component compared to a baseline assessment. Patient-reported outcome measures were also recorded for these same timepoints. Overall, 50 patients were enrolled (62% male (n = 31), with a mean age of 65.7 years (SD 7.3), and mean BMI of 30.2 kg/m. 2. (SD 5.2)). Results. The two-year subsidence was similar for Avenir (-0.018 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.053 to 0.018) and Corail (0.000 mm (95% CI -0.027 to 0.026; p = 0.428). Both anteversion/retroversion (Avenir 0.139° (95% CI -0.204 to 0.481°); Corail -0.196° (95% CI -0.445 to 0.053°; p = 0.110) and varus/valgus tilt (Avenir -0.024° (95% CI -0.077 to 0.028); Corail -0.049° (95% CI -0.098 to 0.000°; p = 0.473) were not statistically significantly different. After two years, patients reported similar improvements in EuroQol five-dimension five-level health questionnaire (Avenir 0.22 (SD 0.2); Corail 0.22 (SD 0.18); p = 0.965) and other outcomes scores. Patient satisfaction on a five-point Likert scale was also similar between both groups after two years (Avenir 1.38 (SD 0.88); Corail 1.33 (SD 0.57); p = 0.846). Conclusion. The performance of both femoral components was similar in terms of stability and patient outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(10):1045–1051

Aims. Highly polished stems with force-closed design have shown satisfactory clinical results despite being related to relatively high early migration. It has been suggested that the minimal thickness of cement mantles surrounding the femoral stem should be 2 mm to 4 mm to avoid aseptic loosening. The line-to-line cementing technique of the femoral stem, designed to achieve stem press-fit, challenges this opinion. We compared the migration of a highly polished stem with force-closed design by standard and line-to-line cementing to investigate whether differences in early migration of the stems occur in a clinical study. Methods. In this single-blind, randomized controlled, clinical radiostereometric analysis (RSA) study, the migration pattern of the cemented Corail hip stem was compared between line-to-line and standard cementing in 48 arthroplasties. The primary outcome measure was femoral stem migration in terms of rotation and translation around and along with the X-, Y-, and Z- axes measured using model-based RSA at three, 12, and 24 months. A linear mixed-effects model was used for statistical analysis. Results. Results from mixed model analyses revealed a lower mean retroversion for line-to-line (0.72° (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38° to 1.07°; p < 0.001), but no significant differences in subsidence between the techniques (-0.15 mm (95% CI -0.53 to 0.227; p = 0.429) at 24 months. Radiolucent lines measuring < 2 mm wide were found in three and five arthroplasties cemented by the standard and line-to-line method, respectively. Conclusion. The cemented Corail stem with a force-closed design seems to settle earlier and better with the line-to-line cementing method, although for subsidence the difference was not significant. However, the lower rate of migration into retroversion may reduce the wear and cement deformation, contributing to good long-term fixation and implant survival. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):19–26

Aims. Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is widely recognized as a demanding surgical procedure for acetabular reorientation. Reports about the learning curve have primarily focused on complication rates during the initial learning phase. Therefore, our aim was to assess the PAO learning curve from an analytical perspective by determining the number of PAOs required for the duration of surgery to plateau and the accuracy to improve. Methods. The study included 118 consecutive PAOs in 106 patients. Of these, 28 were male (23.7%) and 90 were female (76.3%). The primary endpoint was surgical time. Secondary outcome measures included radiological parameters. Cumulative summation analysis was used to determine changes in surgical duration. A multivariate linear regression model was used to identify independent factors influencing surgical time. Results. The learning curve in this series was 26 PAOs in a period of six months. After 26 PAO procedures, a significant drop in surgical time was observed and a plateau was also achieved. The mean duration of surgery during the learning curve was 103.8 minutes (SD 33.2), and 69.7 minutes (SD 18.6) thereafter (p < 0.001). Radiological correction of acetabular retroversion showed a significant improvement after having performed a total of 93 PAOs, including anteverting PAOs on 35 hips with a retroverted acetabular morphology (p = 0.005). Several factors were identified as independent variables influencing duration of surgery, including patient weight (β = 0.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2 to 0.7); p < 0.001), learning curve procedure phase of 26 procedures (β = 34.0 (95% CI 24.3 to 43.8); p < 0.001), and the degree of lateral correction expressed as the change in the lateral centre-edge angle (β = 0.7 (95% CI 0.001 to 1.3); p = 0.048). Conclusion. The learning curve for PAO surgery requires extensive surgical training at a high-volume centre, with a minimum of 50 PAOs per surgeon per year. This study defined a cut-off value of 26 PAO procedures, after which a significant drop in surgical duration occurred. Furthermore, it was observed that a retroverted morphology of the acetabulum required a greater number of procedures to acquire proficiency in consistently eliminating the crossover sign. These findings are relevant for fellows and fellowship programme directors in establishing the extent of training required to impart competence in PAO. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):336–343