Analysis of morphological parameters in pelvic radiography and hip MRI: A practical reporting recommendation

dc.authorscopusid57192111773
dc.authorscopusid36196212400
dc.contributor.authorCicek,E.D.
dc.contributor.authorCevik,H.
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-25T12:34:12Z
dc.date.available2024-05-25T12:34:12Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.departmentOkan Universityen_US
dc.department-tempCicek E.D., Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences-Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey; Cevik H., Department of Radiology, Okan University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkeyen_US
dc.description.abstractAlthough numerous criteria have been proposed to define abnormal hip morphology, mostly used in the diagnosis of femoroacetabular impingement, it is not a practical approach to measure all of these parameters in all cases without clinical suspicion. In this study, our aim was to develop an evaluating and reporting standardization for routine hip examinations to define both hip morphology and impingement. A total of 108 patients with routine hip magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and antero-posterior pelvic radiograph (PR) were included in this retrospective study. Alpha angle (AA), acetabular depth (AD), acetabular protrusion, acetabular anteversion, collodiaphyseal angle (CDA), lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) and Tönnis angle (TA) were measured. The differences and associations between these parameters were evaluated according to imaging modality or plane, and sex. Although a significant difference has been found between the axial AA and the coronal AA mean values measured on MRI, there was also a strong correlation. Coronal measurements were significantly higher. AA values measured in PR and coronal MRI were comparable. Males had higher AA in both planes as compared to females. There were no significant differences between CDA values in MRI and PR. There was a significant difference and a moderate correlation between AD values in MRI and PR. We suggest that routine reports should include a measurement of AA in two planes, and measurement of CDA in PR or MRI. Due to the difference in AD between MRI and radiography, LCEA or TA may represent better alternatives. Checking for a negative Tönnis sign would represent a practical approach. © 2021, Acta Orthopædica Belgica.en_US
dc.identifier.citation0
dc.identifier.doi10.52628/87.2.11
dc.identifier.endpage283en_US
dc.identifier.issn0001-6462
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.pmidPubMed:34529381
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85115932992
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ4
dc.identifier.startpage275en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.52628/87.2.11
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14517/2557
dc.identifier.volume87en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherARSMB-KVBMGen_US
dc.relation.ispartofActa Orthopaedica Belgicaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectFemoroacetabular impingementen_US
dc.subjectHip morphologyen_US
dc.subjectMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI)en_US
dc.subjectPelvic radiography (PR)en_US
dc.subjectReportingen_US
dc.subjectTönnis signen_US
dc.titleAnalysis of morphological parameters in pelvic radiography and hip MRI: A practical reporting recommendationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files