OP3.1 How does hip arthroscopy influence spinopelvic characteristics amongst patients with femoro-acetabular impingement compared to asymptomatic controls?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: The hip-spine relationship may influence hip pathomechanics. Cam morphology is associated with pain and arthritis, but not all individuals with such morphology are symptomatic. Aims: This study aimed to (1) Compare spinopelvic characteristics between symptomatic patients with CAM-FAI and a matched cohort of asymptomatic volunteers; (2) assess whether spinopelvic characteristics change following femoral osteochondroplasty (FOCP), and (3) test whether spinopelvic characteristics are associated with patient-reported outcome. Methods: This is a prospective, case-control, study at a tertiary referral hospital. From a cohort of 112 patients treated with hip arthroscopy and 44 asymptomatic volunteers (Oxford Hip Score≥45) without osteoarthritis (Tonnis≤1), 50 patients (25 each group) were matched for age (mean: 39±8 years-old; p=0.5), acetabular- (LCEA: 30±6°; p=0.6; AI 4±5°; p=0.7; AWI 0.48±0.13; p=0.2; PWI: 0.91±0.43; p=0.1) and CAM- (alpha-angle: 56±9°; p=0.9) morphology. All underwent standing and deep-seated spinopelvic radiographs pre-operatively and 1-year post-operatively, to measure lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT) and pelvic-femoral angle (PFA). Difference between standing and flexed-seated measurements allowed to uncouple lumbar- (∆LL), pelvic- (∆PT) and hip- (∆PFA) mobility. The Hip User index quantifies the relative contribution of the hip to overall sagittal movement and was calculated as [∆PFA/(∆PFA+∆LL)]*100. Outcome was assessed using the international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT). Results: Pre-operatively, patients had less standing PT compared to controls (11±5° vs. 15±8°; p=0.009) and a lower PFA (190±6° vs. 194±6°; p=0.04). There were no other differences between groups. Post-operatively, patients continued to have lower standing PT (12±7° vs. 15±8°; p=0.02) but had similar similar PFA to controls (194±9° vs. 194±6°; p=0.9). Hip flexion improved by 4±12° (p=0.015), allowing patients to have greater hip flexion than controls (∆PFA 110±16° vs. 101±16°; p=0.013). Hip user index increased following hip arthroscopy (69±7% vs. 63%; p=0.002). In a multi-variate model, pre-operative iHOT was associated with alpha angle (p<0.001), ∆LL (p<0.001), ∆PT (p<0.001) and ∆PFA (p=0.02) (R2 0.9). Standing PFA was best predictor of post-operative iHOT (p=0.001) (R2 0.7). Change in hip mobility moderately correlated with ∆iHOT (rho 0.59). Conclusion: Decreased pelvic tilt is associated with less acetabular anteversion, which reduces impingement-free flexion arc, predisposing to FAI symptoms. iHOT was associated with spinopevic characteristics; the stiffer the segments, the worse the function. Post-surgery, PFA increased (hip more extended when standing) and flexion improved, both of which were associated with patient-reported outcome.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".