Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), defined by an age at presentation of 11 to 18 years, has a prevalence of 0.47% and accounts for approximately 90% of all cases of idiopathic scoliosis. Despite decades of research, the exact aetiology of AIS remains unknown. It is becoming evident that it is the result of a complex interplay of genetic, internal, and environmental factors. It has been hypothesized that genetic variants act as the initial trigger that allow epigenetic factors to propagate AIS, which could also explain the wide phenotypic variation in the presentation of the disorder. A better understanding of the underlying aetiological mechanisms could help to establish the diagnosis earlier and allow a more accurate prediction of deformity progression. This, in turn, would prompt imaging and therapeutic intervention at the appropriate time, thereby achieving the best clinical outcome for this group of patients. Cite this article:
We examined the morphology of mammalian hips asking whether evolution can explain the morphology of impingement in human hips. We describe two stereotypical mammalian hips, coxa recta and coxa rotunda. Coxa recta is characterised by a straight or aspherical section on the femoral head or head-neck junction. It is a sturdy hip seen mostly in runners and jumpers. Coxa rotunda has a round femoral head with ample head-neck offset, and is seen mostly in climbers and swimmers. Hominid evolution offers an explanation for the variants in hip morphology associated with impingement. The evolutionary conflict between upright gait and the birth of a large-brained fetus is expressed in the female pelvis and hip, and can explain pincer impingement in a coxa profunda. In the male hip, evolution can explain cam impingement in coxa recta as an adaptation for running.
Three-dimensional surface models of the normal hemipelvis derived from volumetric CT data on 42 patients were used to determine the radius, depth and orientation of the native acetabulum. A sphere fitted to the lunate surface and a plane matched to the acetabular rim were used to calculate the radius, depth and anatomical orientation of the acetabulum. For the 22 females the mean acetabular abduction, anteversion, radius and normalised depth were 57.1° (50.7° to 66.8°), 24.1° (14.0° to 33.3°), 25 mm (21.7 to 30.3) and 0.79 mm (0.56 to 1.04), respectively. The same parameters for the 20 males were 55.5° (47.7° to 65.9°), 19.3° (8.5° to 32.3°), 26.7 mm (24.5 to 28.7) and 0.85 mm (0.65 to 0.99), respectively. The orientation of the native acetabulum did not match the safe zone for acetabular component placement described by Lewinnek. During total hip replacement surgeons should be aware that the average abduction angle of the native acetabulum exceeds that of the safe zone angle. If the concept of the safe zone angle is followed, abduction of the acetabular component should be less than the abduction of the native acetabulum by approximately 10°.
This paper reports a new method for expressing numerically asymmetry of the contour of the back in a forward-bending position. Information is given at three spinal levels (T8, T12 and L3) for 636 schoolchildren aged 8 to 15 years. Rib-hump and lumbar-hump scores were standardised to create trunk asymmetry scores (TASs) making comparison possible between children of different age, size and sex. Two groups of children were defined: those with clinically straight spines (585 children); and those with clinical evidence of lateral spinal curves (51 children). In the children with clinically straight spines the main findings were: about 1:4 had objectively detectable rib and lumbar humps; female-to-male ratios were 1.2:1 for the thoracic region and 1.4:1 for the lumbar region; right humps were about 10 times more common than left; TASs in the boys and girls at each spinal level had normal distributions about means to the right of zero (where zero represents perfect symmetry); at T8 and T12, a wider scatter of TASs in girls than in boys; at L3, larger TASs in girls than in boys; a relation between shortening of one lower limb and a contralateral hump on the back; and no relation to age (except at L3), stature (corrected for age) or handedness. The findings are discussed in relation to possible causes of back contour asymmetry, early diagnosis of scoliosis by screening,
