Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer?
Publication type: Journal Article
Publication date: 2009-06-30
scimago Q2
wos Q2
SJR: 0.675
CiteScore: 4.5
Impact factor: 2.2
ISSN: 03642348, 14322161
PubMed ID:
19565238
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Abstract
In our institutional experience, determination of the alpha (α) angle at MR arthrography as an indicator of the likelihood of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is fraught with inconsistency. The aims of this study were to quantify the degree of variability in and calculate the diagnostic accuracy of the α angle in suggesting a diagnosis of cam impingement, to determine the accuracy of a positive clinical impingement test, and to suggest alternative MR arthrographic measures of femoral head–neck overgrowth and determine their diagnostic utilities. We carried out a retrospective analysis of MR arthrographic studies performed during a 4-year period, combined with chart analysis, which allowed identification of 78 patients in whom surgical correlation was also available. The status of a preoperative clinical impingement test was also noted. Patients were designated as having cam-type FAI (Group A, n = 39) if intra-operative femoral head–neck junction bony osteochondroplasty/arthoscopic femoral debridement was performed. Group B (n = 39) acted as controls. Three radiologists independently and blindly performed a series of measurements (α angle and two newly proposed measurements) in each patient on two separate occasions. An α angle of greater than 55° was considered indicative of the presence of cam-type FAI. Performance values for α angle measurement were poor for each observer. There was considerable (up to 30% of the mean value) intra-observer variability between the first and second α angle measurements for each subject. Binary logistic regression analysis confirmed that the α angle is of no value in predicting the presence or absence of cam-FAI. A statistically significant difference existed between Groups A and B with regard to the newly proposed anterior femoral distance (AFD; p = 0.004). Using an AFD value of 3.60 mm or greater as being indicative of the presence of cam-FAI yields a 0.67 performance measure (95% confidence interval 0.55–0.79). The second proposed parameter (femoral neck ratio) was of no value in suggesting the presence or absence of this condition. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the clinical impingement test were 76.9%, 87.2%, 85.7% and 79.1% respectively. Femoral α angle measurement is associated with considerable variability. This index performed poorly in our patient population and was statistically of no value in suggesting the presence or absence of cam-FAI. One of our proposed measures, the AFD, outperformed the α angle, though to an insufficient degree to suggest its routine incorporation into clinical practice. Our experience suggests that the clinical impingement test remains the most reliable predictor of the presence of this condition.
Found
Nothing found, try to update filter.
Found
Nothing found, try to update filter.
Top-30
Journals
|
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
|
|
|
Skeletal Radiology
7 publications, 7.37%
|
|
|
Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology
5 publications, 5.26%
|
|
|
American Journal of Roentgenology
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
Radiology
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
Journal of Hip Preservation Surgery
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
British Journal of Radiology
3 publications, 3.16%
|
|
|
American Journal of Sports Medicine
3 publications, 3.16%
|
|
|
European Radiology
3 publications, 3.16%
|
|
|
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
Clinical Imaging
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
Bone and Joint Journal
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
British Journal of Sports Medicine
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Current Orthopaedic Practice
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Korean Journal of Radiology
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Journal of International Medical Research
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Frontiers in Surgery
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Sports Medicine
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
International Orthopaedics
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Frontiers in Radiology
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Musculoskeletal Surgery
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Current Radiology Reports
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Der Radiologe
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
|
Publishers
|
5
10
15
20
25
|
|
|
Springer Nature
24 publications, 25.26%
|
|
|
Elsevier
19 publications, 20%
|
|
|
SAGE
7 publications, 7.37%
|
|
|
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
6 publications, 6.32%
|
|
|
American Roentgen Ray Society
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
Oxford University Press
4 publications, 4.21%
|
|
|
British Institute of Radiology
3 publications, 3.16%
|
|
|
Wiley
3 publications, 3.16%
|
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
BMJ
2 publications, 2.11%
|
|
|
XMLink
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
The Royal College of Surgeons of England
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
MDPI
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
CIC Edizioni Internazionali
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
Brieflands
1 publication, 1.05%
|
|
|
5
10
15
20
25
|
- We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
- Statistics recalculated weekly.
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
95
Total citations:
95
Citations from 2024:
4
(4.21%)
Cite this
GOST |
RIS |
BibTex |
MLA
Cite this
GOST
Copy
Lohan D. G. et al. Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer? // Skeletal Radiology. 2009. Vol. 38. No. 9. pp. 855-862.
GOST all authors (up to 50)
Copy
Lohan D. G., Seeger L. L., Motamedi K., Hame S., Sayre J. Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer? // Skeletal Radiology. 2009. Vol. 38. No. 9. pp. 855-862.
Cite this
RIS
Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1007/s00256-009-0745-3
UR - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0745-3
TI - Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer?
T2 - Skeletal Radiology
AU - Lohan, Derek G.
AU - Seeger, Leanne L.
AU - Motamedi, Kambiz
AU - Hame, Sharon
AU - Sayre, James
PY - 2009
DA - 2009/06/30
PB - Springer Nature
SP - 855-862
IS - 9
VL - 38
PMID - 19565238
SN - 0364-2348
SN - 1432-2161
ER -
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors)
Copy
@article{2009_Lohan,
author = {Derek G. Lohan and Leanne L. Seeger and Kambiz Motamedi and Sharon Hame and James Sayre},
title = {Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer?},
journal = {Skeletal Radiology},
year = {2009},
volume = {38},
publisher = {Springer Nature},
month = {jun},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0745-3},
number = {9},
pages = {855--862},
doi = {10.1007/s00256-009-0745-3}
}
Cite this
MLA
Copy
Lohan, Derek G., et al. “Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer?.” Skeletal Radiology, vol. 38, no. 9, Jun. 2009, pp. 855-862. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0745-3.