Anatomic Predictors of Sagittal Hip and Pelvic Motions in Patients With a Cam Deformity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: As there is a high prevalence of patients with cam deformities and no ongoing hip dysfunction, understanding the biomechanical factors predicting the onset of symptoms and degenerative changes is critical. One such variable is how the spinopelvic parameters may influence hip and pelvic sagittal mobility. Hypothesis/Purpose: Pelvic incidence may predict sagittal hip and pelvic motions during walking and squatting. The purpose was to determine which anatomic characteristics were associated with symptoms and how they influenced functional hip and pelvic ranges of motion (ROMs) during walking and squatting. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Fifty-seven participants underwent computed tomography and were designated either symptomatic (n = 19, cam deformity with pain), asymptomatic (n = 19, cam deformity with no pain), or control (n = 19, no cam deformity or pain). Multiple femoral (cam deformity, neck angle, torsion), acetabular (version, coverage), and spinopelvic (pelvic tilt, sacral slope, pelvic incidence) parameters were measured from each participant’s imaging data, and sagittal hip and pelvic ROMs during walking and squatting were recorded using a motion capture system. Results: Symptomatic participants had large cam deformities, smaller femoral neck-shaft angles, and larger pelvic incidence angles compared with the asymptomatic and control participants. Discriminant function analyses confirmed that radial 1:30 alpha angle (λ 1 = 0.386), femoral neck-shaft angle (λ 2 = 0.262), and pelvic incidence (λ 3 = 0.213) ( P < .001) were the best anatomic parameters to classify participants with their groups. Entering these 3 parameters into a hierarchical linear regression, significant regressions were achieved for hip ROM only when pelvic incidence was included for walking ( R 2 = 0.20, P = .01) and squatting ( R 2 = 0.14, P = .04). A higher pelvic incidence decreased walking hip ROM ( r = −0.402, P = .004). Although symptomatic participants indicated a trend of reduced squatting hip and pelvic ROMs, there were no significant regressions with the anatomic parameters. Conclusion: A cam deformity alone may not indicate early clinical signs or decreased ROM. Not only was pelvic incidence a significant parameter to classify the participants, but it was also an important parameter to predict functional ROM. Symptomatic patients with a higher pelvic incidence may experience limited sagittal hip mobility. Clinical Relevance: Patients with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement showed a higher pelvic incidence and, combined with a cam deformity and varus neck, can perhaps alter the musculature of their iliopsoas, contributing to a reduced sagittal ROM. With an early and accurate clinical diagnosis, athletes could benefit from a muscle training strategy to protect their hips.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».