FP1.6 Influence of femoral and acetabular version on the type and location of labral tears among patients treated with hip arthroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Femoral and acetabular anteversion have been recognized as contributing factors to hip pain among patients with femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI). However, to what extend version abnormalities contribute to chondrolabral damage is unclear. Some suggest that combined low version is associated with better cartilage health and less synovitis. However, low femoral version reduces range of motion, leading to impingement with less flexion. Aims: This study aimed to assess differences in the location and type of labral tears in hips with different rotational morphology amongst patients treated with hip arthroscopy. Methods: This is a prospective consecutive cohort study of 314 hips who underwent hip arthroscopy at a tertiary referral center (age 34±10 years-old, 57% females) for FAI (78%), labral tear (17%) or dysplasia (5%). Patients underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan to measure acetabular and femoral version (using Reikeras technique; normal: 5°-20°). Alpha-angle was calculated and impingement index was calculated as the alpha-angle minus femoral version. Presence, type and location of labral tears was assessed intra-operatively using an acetabular clockface system. Results: There was no difference in central (p=0.4) or cranial (p=0.8) acetabular version between different locations of a labral tear. Femoral version was the highest among patients with a labral tear in zone 3 (12°±10°), compared to those with a labral tear in zone 2 (6±9°; p=0.002), or zone 4 (8±8°; p=0.08). Patients with combined cam and low femoral version were more likely to have a labral tear in zone 2 (51%) than zone 3 (28%) (p=0.009). Mean impingement index was 42±16. Patients with an intact labrum had a lower impingement index than those with a frayed (p=0.009), torn (p=0.048) and ossified labrum (p=0.019). Based on ROC analysis, impingement index >36 was associated with presence of a labral tear (sensitivity 64%, specificity 86%) (AUC 0.86±0.08; p<0.001). Conclusion: Femoral version has an influence on the presence and location of labral tears. The low femoral version contributes to anterior impingement in patients with FAI. The combination of low femoral version and presence of CAM morphology may reduce likelilood of labral pathology. Calculating the impingement index may help to consent patients prior to hip arthroscopy.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".