Aims. Slipped upper femoral epiphysis (SUFE) has well documented biochemical and mechanical risk factors. Femoral and acetabular morphologies seem to be equally important. Acetabular retroversion has a low prevalence in asymptomatic adults. Hips with dysplasia, osteoarthritis, and Perthes’ disease, however, have higher rates, ranging from 18% to 48%. The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of acetabular retroversion in patients presenting with SUFE using both validated radiological signs and tomographical measurements. Methods. A retrospective review of all SUFE surgical cases presenting to the Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, from 2012 to 2019 were evaluated. Preoperative plain radiographs were assessed for slip angle, validated radiological signs of retroversion, and standardized postoperative CT scans were used to assess cranial and mid-acetabular version. Results. In all, 116 SUFEs presented in 107 patients who underwent surgical intervention; 47 (52%) were male, with a mean age of 12.7 years (7.5 to 16.6). Complete radiological data was available for 91 patients (99 hips) with adequate axial CT imaging of both hips. Overall, 82 patients (82%) underwent pinning in situ (PIS), with subcapital realignment surgery (SRS) performed in 17 patients (18%) (slip angles > 75°). Contralateral prophylactic PIS was performed in 72 patients (87%). On the slip side, 62 patients (68%) had one or more radiological sign of retroversion. Tomographical acetabular retroversion was more pronounced cranially than caudally of the acetabulum on both the affected side and the contralateral side (p < 0.001) as expected in the normal population. Increasing severity of the slip was found to be directly proportional to the degree of reduction in cranial and central acetabular version (p < 0.05) in the SUFE hips. Conclusion. Acetabular retroversion is more prevalent in patients with SUFE than previously reported, and have been shown be correlated to the severity of the slip presentation. The presence of radiological signs of acetabular retroversion could be used to justify prophylactic contralateral pinning. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(2):158–164

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

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) – enlarged, aspherical femoral head deformity (cam-type) or retroversion/overcoverage of the acetabulum (pincer-type) – is a leading cause for early hip osteoarthritis. Although anteverting/reverse periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) to address FAI aims to preserve the native hip and restore joint function, it is still unclear how it affects joint mobility and stability. This in vitro cadaveric study examined the effects of surgical anteverting PAO on range of motion and capsular mechanics in hips with acetabular retroversion. Twelve cadaveric hips (n = 12, m:f = 9:3; age = 41 ± 9 years; BMI = 23 ± 4 kg/m2) were included in this study. Each hip was CT imaged and indicated acetabular retroversion (i.e., crossover sign, posterior wall sign, ischial wall sign, retroversion index > 20%, axial plane acetabular version < 15°); and showed no other abnormalities on CT data. Each hip was denuded to the bone-and-capsule and mounted onto a 6-DOF robot tester (TX90, Stäubli), equipped with a universal force-torque sensor (Omega85, ATI). The robot positioned each hip in five sagittal angles: Extension, Neutral 0°, Flexion 30°, Flexion 60°, Flexion 90°; and performed hip internal-external rotations and abduction-adduction motions to 5 Nm in each position. After the intact stage was tested, each hip underwent an anteverting PAO, anteverting the acetabulum and securing the fragment with long bone screws. The capsular ligaments were preserved during the surgery and each hip was retested postoperatively in the robot. Postoperative CT imaging confirmed that the acetabular fragment was properly positioned with adequate version and head coverage. Paired sample t-tests compared the differences in range of motion before and after PAO (CI = 95%; SPSS v.24, IBM). Preoperatively, the intact hips with acetabular retroversion demonstrated constrained internal-external rotations and abduction-adduction motions. The PAO reoriented the acetabular fragment and medialized the hip joint centre, which tightened the iliofemoral ligament and slackenend the pubofemoral ligament. Postoperatively, internal rotation increased in the deep hip flexion positions of Flexion 60° (∆IR = +7°, p = 0.001) and Flexion 90° (∆IR = +8°, p = 0.001); while also demonstrating marginal decreases in external rotation in all positions. In addition, adduction increased in the deep flexion positions of Flexion 60° (∆ADD = +11°, p = 0.002) and Flexion 90° (∆ADD = +12°, p = 0.001); but also showed marginal increases in abduction in all positions. The anteverting PAO restored anterosuperior acetabular clearance and increased internal rotation (28–33%) and adduction motions (29–31%) in deep hip flexion. Restricted movements and positive impingement tests typically experienced in these positions with acetabular retroversion are associated with clinical symptoms of FAI (i.e., FADIR). However, PAO altered capsular tensions by further tightening the anterolateral hip capsule which resulted in a limited external rotation and a stiffer and tighter hip. Capsular tightness may still be secondary to acetabular retroversion, thus capsular management may be warranted for larger corrections or rotational osteotomies. In efforts to optimize surgical management and clinical outcomes, anteverting PAO is a viable option to address FAI due to acetabular retroversion or overcoverage

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 (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

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

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

INTRODUCTION:. Acetabular retroversion has been implicated as a risk factor for the development of early hip osteoarthritis. In clinical practice standard osseous signs such as the cross-over sign (COS) and the posterior wall sign (PWS) are widely used to establish the diagnosis of acetabular retroversion on plain radiographs. Despite standardized radiological evaluation protocols, an increased pelvic tilt can lead to a misdiagnosis of acetabular retroversion in AP radiographs and 2D MR or CT scans. Previous studies have shown that the elimination of observer bias using a standardized methodology based on 3D-CT models and the anterior pelvic plane (APP) for the assessment of COS and PWS results in greater diagnostic accuracy. Using this method a prevalence of 28% for COS and 24% for PWS has been found in a cohort of patients with symptoms indicative of FAI, however the prevalence of both signs in asymptomatic adults remains unknown. This study therefore sought to establish the prevalence of the COS and PWS in relation to the APP in an asymptomatic population using a reliable and accurate 3 D-CT based assessment. METHODS:. A large pool of consecutive CT scans of the pelvis undertaken in our department for conditions unrelated to disorders of the hip was available for analysis. Scans in subjects with a Harris hip score of less than 90 points were excluded leaving a sample of 100 asymptomatic subjects (200 hips) for this study. A previously established 3D analysis method designed to eliminate errors resulting from variations in the position and orientation of the pelvis during CT imaging was applied to determine in order to assess the prevalence of the COS and PWS in relation to the APP. Here, the acetabuli were defined as retroverted if either the COS, PWS or both were positive. RESULTS:. From the total of 200 hips a positive COS was identified in 24% (48/200) and a positive PWS was detected in 6.5% (13/200) relative to the APP using the CT data. A. In male adults a COS was observed in 25.4% (29/114) and a PWS in 10.5% (12/114). In female adults a COS were observed in 22.1% (19/86) and a PWS in 1.2% (1/86). DISCUSSION:. The high incidence of acetabular retroversion observed using an accurate 3D-CT based methodology shows that this anatomic configuration might not differ in frequency between asymptomatic individuals and patients with symptomatic FAI. Patients presenting with hip pain and evidence of FAI should therefore be subjected to strict diagnostic scrutiny, as the presence of a COS and/or PWS shows a poor correlation with the presence of symptomatic disease. In our collective of asymptomatic adults the COS showed a higher incidence than the PWS. Additionally a deficiency of the posterior acetabular wall was rare in asymptomatic adults compared to FAI patients. Therefore, the question whether an abnormal acetabular version does indeed lead to the development of osteoarthritis in all patients warrants further study. Although an association between osteoarthritis and femuro-acetabular impingement is believed to exist, long-term epidemiological studies are needed to establish the natural history of these anatomical configurations

Abstract. Objective. To assess the prevalence of acetabular retroversion in patients presenting with Slipped Upper Femoral Epiphysis using both validated radiological signs and CT-angle measurements. Methods. A retrospective review of all cases involving surgical management for acute SUFE presenting to the Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne were assessed from 2012–2018. Pre-operative plain radiographs were assessed for slip angle, validated radiological signs of retroversion (post wall/crossover/ischial spine sign) and standardised post-operative CT Scans were used to assess cranial and mid-acetabular version. Results. 116 SUFEs presented in 107 patients who underwent surgical intervention; 47 females and 60 boys, with an average age of 12.7 years (range 7.5–16.6 years). Complete radiological data was available for 91 patients (99 hips) with adequate axial CT imaging of both hips. 82% patients underwent pinning in situ (PIS) with subcapital realignment surgery (SRS) performed in 18% (slip angles >75°). Contralateral prophylactic hip PIS was performed in 72 patients (87%). On the slip side, 68% of patients had 1 or more radiological signs of retroversion in the slipped hip, with 60% on the contralateral side. The mean cranial and mid-acetabular version measurements were −8°(range −30 – 8°) and 10.5°(range −10 – 25°), respectively. Conclusions. Acetabular retroversion is rare in the normal population with studies reports ranging from 0–7%. This study showed an increased prevalence of 68% in SUFE patients, which is likely to be a primary anatomical abnormality, subsequently increasing the shear forces across the proximal femoral growth plate due to superior over-coverage. The resulting CAM lesion from SUFE in combination with the pincer lesion due to retroversion can lead to premature hip impingement and degeneration. Further larger studies are required to assess if acetabular retroversion is a true risk factor, and its role in helping guide management including prophylactic pinning. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Introduction. Acetabular retroversion is an accepted cause of Pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement. There is increasing evidence that acetabular retroversion is rather a rotational abnormality of the pelvis than an overgrowth of the acetabular wall or even a dysplasia of the posterior wall. Initially, patients with a retroverted acetabulum were treated with an open rim trimming through a surgical hip dislocation (SHD) based on the early understanding of the pathomorphology. Theoretically, the reduction of the anterior wall can decrease the already small joint contact area in retroverted hips to a critical size. Based on the most recent literature, anteverting periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) seems to be the more appropriate surgical treatment. With this technique, the anterior impingement conflict can be treated efficiently without compromising the joint contact area. However, it is unknown whether this theoretical advantage in turn results in better mid term results of treatment. Objectives. We asked if anteverting PAO results in better clinical and radiographical mid term results compared to rim trimming through a surgical hip dislocation. Methods. We performed a retrospective comparative study based on 257 hips (221 patients) with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement due to acetabular retroversion. Acetabular retroversion was defined by a cross-over sign, a posterior wall sign, and a positive ischial spine sign. We then formed two matched groups consisting of 73 hips undergoing open acetabular rim trimming and 54 hips with an anteverting periacetabular osteotomy. Patients with incomplete radiographic documentation, previous surgery, and hip dysplasia (LCE < 20°) were excluded. Some patients were excluded due to a matching process (Fig. 1). Patients were generally followed clinically and radiographically after two, five and ten years. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed using the following endpoints: a low clinical score, radiographic progression of osteoarthritis, and/or the conversion to total hip arthroplasty. The Log Rank Score was used to compare the two survivorship curves. Results. Patients undergoing anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion had a significantly increased survivorship (82%, 95% confidence interval, 72–91%) at seven years in comparison to open surgical rim trimming (63%, 95%CI, 49–76%, p<0.0001). The two survivorship curves are comparable for the first four years with a substantial drop for the rim trimming group after year five (Fig. 2). Conclusion. This study proofs for the first time that the theoretical advantages of anteverting periacetabular osteotomy in hips with symptomatic acetabular retroversion results in an increased survivorship at mid term follow-up in comparison to open rim trimming. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly (see Info & Metrics tab above).

Traumatic hip dislocation is a rare injury in orthopaedic practice and typically occures in high energy trauma. The goal of this study was to analyze hip morphology in patients with low energy traumatic hip dislocations and to compare it with a control group. We performed a retrospective comparative study. The study group included 45 patients with 45 traumatic posterior hip dislocation. Inclusion criteria were traumatic hip dislocation with simple acetabular rim or Pipkin I or II fracture. Traumatic dislocations combined with other acetabular or femoral fractures were excluded. The control group consisted of 90 patients (180 hips) that underwent radiographic examination for urogenital indication and had no history of hip pain. Hip morphology was assessed on antero-posterior and axial views. The study group showed significantly increased incidence (p<0.001) of positive cross-over sign (82% vs. 27%) with a increased retroversion index (26 ± 17 [0–56] vs. 6 ± 12 [0–53]), positive ischial spine sign (70% vs. 34%), and positive posterior wall sign (79% vs. 21). Hips that underwent an low energy posterior traumatic hip dislocation show significanly more radiographic signs for acetabular retroversion compared to a control group. Therefore, acetabular retroversion seems to be a contributing factor for posterior traumatic hip dislocation

Background: Acetabular retroversion has been proposed to contribute to the development of osteoarthritis of the hip. For the diagnosis of this condition, conventional AP pelvic radiographs may represent a reliable, easily available diagnostic modality as they can be obtained with a reproducible technique allowing the anterior and posterior acetabular rims to be visible for assessment. This study was designed to. establish a method to directly quantify anatomic acetabular version on AP pelvic radiographs and to. determine the validity of the radiographic “cross-over-sign” to detect acetabular retroversion. Methods: Using 43 desiccated pelves (86 acetabuli) the anatomic acetabular versions were measured at three different transverse planes (cranially, centrally and caudally). From these pelves, standardized AP pelvic radiographs were obtained. To directly measure central acetabular version (AV), a modified radiographic method is introduced for the use of AP pelvic radiographs. Moreover, the validity of the radiographic “cross-over-sign” to detect cranial acetabular retroversion was determined. Results: The mean central and caudal anatomic AV were approximately 20°, the mean cranial AV was 8°. Cranial retroversion (AV < 0°) was present in 19 of 86 hips (22%). A linear correlation was found between the central and cranial AV. Below 10° of central AV, all acetabuli were cranially retroverted. Between 10° and 20°, 30% of the acetabuli were cranially retroverted and above 20°, only one of 45 acetabuli was cranially retroverted. The radiographic measurement of the central AV (20.3° ± 6.5) correlated strongly with the anatomic AV (20.1° ± 6.4). The sensitivity of the ‘cross-over-sign’ to detect an cranial acetabular anteversion of less than 4° was 96%, its specificity 95%, and the positive predictive and negative predictive values 90% and 98%, respectively. Conclusions: The cranial AV is on average 12° lower than the central AV, with the latter directly measurable from AP pelvic radiographs. A central AV of less than 10° was associated with cranial retroversion. The presence of a positive ‘cross-over-sign’ is a highly reliable indicator of cranial AV of < 4°

Acetabular retroversion is a well-documented cause of femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI). There are few reports of long-term outcomes following correction of retroversion. We hypothesized that correction of acetabular retroversion with peri-acetabular osteotomy (PAO) in young adults with symptomatic FAI can lead to symptomatic relief, improvement of function and thus potentially delay the progression of osteoarthritis. Twenty-two patients (29 hips) underwent Bernese PAO for treatment of symptomatic FAI with acetabular retroversion between April 1997 and August 1999. Mean age at surgery was 23 years (14–41). Mean duration of symptoms was 17 months (6–24). All pre-operative radiographs demonstrated Tönnis grade 0 of degenerative changes. Mean follow up was 127 months (109–142). Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes are presented. The overall mean Merle d’Aubigné score improved from 14.0 points (12–16) pre-operatively to 16.3 points (14 to 18) at the time of last follow-up. There were three reoperations due to loss of correction, posterior impingement and cam impingement. There were no major vascular or neurologic complications and none related to non- healing of the osteotomies. All patients had symptomatic relief at final follow-up. Range of motion and functional scores improved in all cases (even in those with repeat procedures). The vast majority of patients continued to demonstrate no signs of osteoarthritis (Tönnis greade 0) at final follow-up. Acetabular retroversion is a mechanical factor that can lead to FAI. In symptomatic cases, PAO is a safe and reliable method for correction of the retroversion and can relief symptoms, improve function and prevent rapid progression of osteoarthritis

Purpose. Diagnosis of acetabular retroversion is essential in femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), but its assessment from radiographs is complicated by pelvic tilt and the two-dimensional nature of plain films. We performed a study to validate the diagnostic accuracy of the crossover sign (COS) and the posterior wall sign (PWS) in identifying acetabular retroversion. Method. COS and PWS were evaluated from radiographs and computed tomography (CT) scans as the standard of reference in 50 hips of subjects with symptoms of FAI. A CT-based method using 3-D models was developed to measure the COS, PWS, true acetabular version and pelvic tilt relative to the anterior pelvic plane. The new CT-based method aimed to eliminate errors resulting from variations in the position and orientation of the pelvis during imaging. Results. A low level of agreement for COS and PWS was found between radiographs and CT scans. A positive COS strongly correlated with pelvic tilt. Conclusion. These results suggest that COS and PWS determined from anteroposterior (AP) radiographs are considerably limited by pelvic tilt and inherent limitations of radiographs. Their use as the sole basis for deciding whether or not surgical intervention is indicated seems questionable. NO DISCLOSURES

Introduction: The diagnosis of acetabular retroversion has traditionally been established by the presence of a cross-over sign on a plain pelvic radiograph. This however can be greatly influenced by the radiograph’s quality and degree of pelvic tilt. The aim of this study was to look at the relationship between cross-over and true anatomical version as measured in relation to an anatomical reference plane. The secondary aim was to determine whether in true retroversion there was excess coverage of the femoral head anteriorly. Materials and Methods: Radiographs of 33 patients (64 hips) being investigated for symptoms of femoro-acetabular impingement were analysed. The presence of a cross-over sign was documented and the extent of cross-over was measured by noting the point on the rim where the cross-over occurs. CT scans of the same hips were analysed to determine anatomical version, and to calculate total, anterior and posterior coverage of the femoral head. This was done in relation to the anterior pelvic plane after correcting for pelvic tilt. Results: The sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values for the cross-over sign were 92%, 55%, 59% and 91% respectively. The cross-over distance was correlated with 3D version (p=0.01). There was no significant difference in total cover of the femoral head between the anteverted and retroverted subgroups (71% vs. 72% respectively; p=0.55). Anterior cover was higher in the retroverted subgroup (35% vs. 32%; p = 0.0001), and posterior cover was significantly lower in this subgroup (37% vs. 39%; p = 0.002). Discussion: Although the cross-over sign was sensitive enough to identify 92% of the retroverted cases, its specificity was low with just under half of the anteverted cases being labelled as retroverted. The findings for femoral head cover suggest that retroversion is characterised by posterior deficiency and increased cover anteriorly

Introduction: Obligatory external rotation during flexion is well recognised as a cardinal feature of Slipped Upper Femoral Epiphyses (SUFE). We have evaluated the significance of acetabular version in contributing to the external rotational deformity that is seen in otherwise normal hips. We present a small case series focussing on the characteristics of this pathology, highlighting its significance and outlining a treatment strategy. Method: Five patients (eight hips) presented with disabling hip pain during non-sporting activities. All their hip radiographs had been reported as normal. The rotational profile of both acetabulum and femur in these patients was evaluated by MRI and CT scans. Results: Clinical examination revealed otherwise normal hips but for an external rotation deformity which got worse on hip flexion. The average external rotation deformity with the hip in extension was 60 degrees, which worsened to 90 degrees during hip flexion. Three of these hips had been previously treated with in situ pinning for SUFE. Other hips were in patients who were either skeletally mature or close to skeletal maturity. We found that all were “profunda hips” with severe acetabular retroversion. The abnormality in acetabular version was best defined on axial imaging. Conclusions: The femoral head is a spherical conchoid. The concept of version of the hip (both femoral and acetabular) as described by McKibbin, Tonnis and Ganz is reviewed. Femoral retroversion is common in patients with SUFE, but the addition of acetabular retroversion makes these hips disproportionately symptomatic. This deformity causes a combination of pincer and cam impingement, which is responsible for the marked disability. SUFE alone causes cam impingement, whilst a corresponding degree of slip without retroversion and profunda of the acetabulum is not that disabling

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 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

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 was to investigate whether anterior pelvic plane-pelvic tilt (APP-PT) is associated with distinct hip pathomorphologies. We asked: is there a difference in APP-PT between young symptomatic patients being evaluated for joint preservation surgery and an asymptomatic control group? Does APP-PT vary among distinct acetabular and femoral pathomorphologies? And does APP-PT differ in symptomatic hips based on demographic factors?. Methods. This was an institutional review board-approved, single-centre, retrospective, case-control, comparative study, which included 388 symptomatic hips in 357 patients who presented to our tertiary centre for joint preservation between January 2011 and December 2015. Their mean age was 26 years (SD 2; 23 to 29) and 50% were female. They were allocated to 12 different morphological subgroups. The study group was compared with a control group of 20 asymptomatic hips in 20 patients. APP-PT was assessed in all patients based on supine anteroposterior pelvic radiographs using validated HipRecon software. Values in the two groups were compared using an independent-samples t-test. Multiple regression analysis was performed to examine the influences of diagnoses and demographic factors on APP-PT. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for APP-PT was defined as > 1 SD. Results. There were no significant differences in APP-PT between the control group and the overall group (1.1° (SD 3.0°; -4.9° to 5.9°) vs 1.8° (SD 3.4°; -6.9° to 13.2°); p = 0.323). Acetabular retroversion and overcoverage groups showed higher mean APP-PTs compared with the control group (p = 0.001 and p = 0.014) and were the only diagnoses with a significant influence on APP-PT in the stepwise multiple regression analysis. All differences were below the MCID. The age, sex, height, weight, and BMI showed no influence on APP-PT. Conclusion. APP-PT showed no radiologically significant variation across different pathomorphologies of the hip in patients being assessed for joint-preserving surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):3–10