Introduction

Interactions between hip, pelvis and spine, as abnormal spinopelvic movements, have been associated with inferior outcomes following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Changes in pelvis position lead to a mutual change in functional cup orientation, with both pelvic tilt and rotation having a significant effect on version. Hip osteoarthritis (OA) patients have shown reduced hip kinematics which may place increased demands on the pelvis and the spine.

Sagittal and coronal planes assessments are commonly done as these can be adequately studied with anteroposterior and lateral radiographs. However, abnormal pelvis rotation is likely to compromise the outcome as they have a detrimental effect on cup orientation and increased impingement risk. This study aims to determine the association between dynamic motion and radiographic sagittal assessments; and examine the association between axial and sagittal spinal and pelvic kinematics between hip OA patients and healthy controls (CTRL).

The literature indicates that femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) patients do not return to the level of controls (CTRL) following surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare hip biomechanics during stair climbing tasks in FAI patients before and two years after undergoing corrective surgery against healthy controls (CTRL).

A total of 27 participants were included in this study. All participants underwent CT imaging at the local hospital, followed by three-dimensional motion analysis done at the human motion biomechanics laboratory at the local university. Participants who presented a cam deformity >50.5° in the oblique-axial or >60° in the radial planes, respectively, and who had a positive impingement test were placed in the FAI group (n=11, age=34.1±7.4 years, BMI=25.4±2.7 kg/m2). The remaining participants had no cam deformity and negative impingement test and were placed in the CTRL group (n=16, age=33.2±6.4 years, BMI=26.3±3.2 kg/m2). The CTRL group completed the biomechanics protocol once, whereas the FAI group completed the protocol twice, once prior to undergoing corrective surgery for the cam FAI, and the second time at approximately two years following surgery.

At the human motion biomechanics laboratory, participants were outfitted with 45 retroreflective markers placed according to the UOMAM marker set. Participants completed five trials of stairs task on a three step instrumented stair case to measure ground reaction forces while 10 Vicon MX-13 cameras recorded the marker trajectories. Data was processed using Nexus software and divided into stair ascent and stair descent tasks. The trials were imported into custom written MatLab software to extract peak pelvis and hip kinematics and hip kinetic variables. Non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to determine significant (p < 0.05) differences between the groups.

No significant differences occurred during the stair descent task between any of the groups. During the stair ascent task, the CTRL group had significantly greater peak hip flexion angle (Pre-Op=58±7.1°, Post-Op=58.1±6.6°, CTRL=64.1±5.1°) and sagittal hip range of motion (ROM) (Pre-Op=56.7±6.7°, Post-Op=56.3±5.5°, CTRL=61.7±4.2°) than both the pre- and post-operative groups. Pre-operatively, the FAI group had significantly less peak hip adduction angle (Pre-Op=2±4.5°, Post-Op=3.4±4.4°, CTRL=5.5±3.7°) and hip frontal ROM (Pre-Op=9.9±3.4°, Post-Op=11.9±5.4°, CTRL=13.4±2.5°) compared to the CTRL group. No significant differences occurred in the kinetic variables.

Our findings are in line with the Rylander and colleagues (2013) who also found that hip sagittal ROM did not improve following corrective surgery. Their study included a mix of cam and pincer-type FAI, and had a mean follow-up of approximately one year. Our cohort included only cam FAI and they had a mean follow-up of approximately two years, indicating with the extra year, the patients still did not show sagittal hip kinematics improvement. In the frontal plane, there was no significant difference between the post-op and the CTRL, indicating that the postoperative FAI reached the level of the CTRLs. This is in line with recent work that indicates a more medialized hip contact force vector following surgery, suggesting better hip stabilization.

With the growing number of individuals with asymptomatic cam-type deformities, elevated alpha angles alone do not always explain clinical signs of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Differences in additional anatomical parameters may affect hip joint mechanics, altering the pathomechanical process resulting in symptomatic FAI. The purpose was to examine the association between anatomical hip joint parameters and kinematics and kinetics variables, during level walking.

Fifty participants (m = 46, f = 4; age = 34 ± 7 years; BMI = 26 ± 4 kg/m²) underwent CT imaging and were diagnosed as either: symptomatic (15), if they showed a cam deformity and clinical signs; asymptomatic (19), if they showed a cam deformity, but no clinical signs; or control (16), if they showed no cam deformity and no clinical signs. Each participant's CT data was measured for: axial and radial alpha angles, femoral head-neck offset, femoral neck-shaft angle, medial proximal femoral angle, femoral torsion, acetabular version, and centre-edge angle. Participants performed level walking trials, which were recorded using a ten-camera motion capture system (Vicon MX-13, Oxford, UK) and two force plates (Bertec FP4060–08, Columbus, OH, USA). Peak sagittal and frontal hip joint angles, range of motion, and moments were calculated using a custom programming script (MATLAB R2015b, Natick, MA, USA). A one-way, between groups ANOVA examined differences among kinematics and kinetics variables (α = 0.05), using statistics software (IBM SPSS v.23, Armonk, NY, USA); while a stepwise multiple regression analysis examined associations between anatomical parameters and kinematics and kinetics variables.

No significant differences in kinematics were observed between groups. The symptomatic group demonstrated lower peak hip abduction moments (0.12 ± 0.08 Nm/kg) than the control group (0.22 ± 0.10 Nm/kg, p = 0.01). Sagittal hip range of motion showed a moderate, negative correlation with radial alpha angle (r = −0.33, p = 0.02), while peak hip abduction moment correlated with femoral neck-shaft angle (r = 0.36, p = 0.009) and negatively with femoral torsion (r = −0.36, p = 0.009). With peak hip abduction moment in the stepwise regression analysis, femoral torsion accounted for a variance of 13.3% (F(1, 48) = 7.38; p = 0.009), while together with femoral neck-shaft angle accounted for a total variance of 20.4% (R² change = 0.07, F(2, 47) = 6.01; p = 0.047).

Although elevated radial alpha angles may have limited sagittal range of motion, the cam deformity parameters did not affect joint moments. Femoral neck-shaft angle and femoral torsion were significantly associated with peak hip abduction moment, suggesting that the insertion location of the abductor affects muscle's length and its resultant force vector. A varus neck angle, combined with severe femoral torsion, may ultimately influence muscle moment arms and hip mechanics in individuals with cam FAI.