MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936445045 · doi:10.1097/corr.0000000000000699

Bilateral Femoroacetabular Impingement: What is the Fate of the Asymptomatic Hip?

2019· article· en· W2936445045 on OpenAlexaff
İbrahim Azboy, Hasan Hüseyin Ceylan, Hannah Groff, Hamed Vahedi, Javad Parvizi

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsIntellijoint Surgical (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFemoroacetabular impingementAsymptomaticRadiological weaponRetrospective cohort studySurgeryOrthopedic surgeryYoung adultRadiographyPresentation (obstetrics)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bilateral symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is common. However, the fate of asymptomatic hip in patients with the radiographic diagnosis of bilateral FAI and unilateral symptoms remains unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the likelihood of the asymptomatic hip becoming painful in patients with unilateral symptoms but with radiographic evidence of bilateral femoroacetabular impingement? (2) What radiological and clinical factors are associated with the development of symptoms in an asymptomatic hip diagnosed with FAI? METHODS: A longitudinally maintained institutional FAI database was queried to collect relevant data for this retrospective study. To answer our research questions, we created a cohort of patients with bilateral radiographic signs of FAI but only unilateral symptoms at the time of initial presentation. Between 2004 and 2016, a senior surgeon (JP) at one institution treated 652 patients for hip pain determined to be from FAI, a diagnosis we made based on clinical symptoms, physical exam, and diagnostic imaging. We excluded 95 patients (15%) because of inadequate data or other diagnoses, which left 557 patients. Of those, 170 patients (31%) had bilateral radiological diagnosis of FAI, and 88 (52%) of them had bilateral hip symptoms, and so were excluded. Of the remaining 82 patients, eight (10%) underwent bilateral FAI surgery under the same anesthetic despite having only unilateral symptoms, leaving 74 for analysis in this study. Patients were followed with annual clinic visits, or contacted by phone and electronically. We defined onset of symptoms using a modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) or the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale, and used a logistic regression model to identify factors associated with the development of symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 74 patients with bilateral FAI and an asymptomatic hip at initial presentation, 60 (81%) became symptomatic at a mean 2 years (range, 0.3-11 years) followup. Of these 60 patients, 43 (72%) eventually underwent subsequent surgical intervention. After controlling for potential confounding variables such as sex, age, BMI, history of trauma we identified that reduced neck-shaft angle (r = -0.243, p = 0.009), increased lateral center-edge angle (r = 0.123, p = 0.049), increased alpha angle (r = 0.069, p = 0.025), and younger age (r = -0.071, p = 0.046) were associated with the development of symptoms in the contralateral hip. With the numbers available, none of the other examined variables such as sex, BMI, history of trauma, psychiatric condition, employment, Tönnis grade, Tönnis angle, crossover sign, type of impingement, and joint congruency were found to be associated with symptom progression. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral FAI may be observed about one-third of patients. Most patients with unilateral symptomatic FAI and radiographic diagnosis of bilateral FAI in this cohort became symptomatic relatively quickly and most of them underwent subsequent surgical intervention in the contralateral hip. Reduced neck-shaft angle, increased lateral center-edge angle, increased alpha angle, and younger age were associated with symptom development in the contralateral hip. Hip preservation surgeons may use the finding of this study to counsel patients who present with bilateral FAI but only unilateral symptoms about the natural history of their condition. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.347 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Orthopaedics and Related ResearchSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207