Skip to main content
Log in

Femoroacetabuläres Pincer-Impingement

Femoroacetabular pincer impingement

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Arthroskopie Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Beim Pincer-Impingement kommt es durch repetitive Kontusionen zwischen Pfannenrand und Schenkelhals primär zu einer Schädigung des Labrums und sekundär zu progredienten Knorpelschäden. Ohne frühzeitige Diagnostik und Behandlung ist mit der Entstehung einer vorzeitigen Arthrose zu rechnen. Ursprünglich erfolgte die Therapie im Rahmen eines offenen Eingriffs, meist in Kombination mit einer chirurgischen Hüftluxation.

Fragestellung

Wie gestaltet sich eine adäquate Diagnostik und welchen Stellenwert hat die Hüftarthroskopie in der Behandlung des femoroacetabulären Pincer-Impingements heute.

Material und Methode

Die Übersichtsarbeit basiert auf einer selektiven Literaturrecherche und der persönlichen Erfahrung.

Ergebnisse

Eine gezielte klinische Untersuchung und radiologische Abklärung, insbesondere mittels Arthro-MRT, ermöglicht eine frühzeitige, sichere Diagnosestellung. Die Literatur zeigt, dass eine arthroskopische Behandlung möglich ist.

Schlussfolgerungen

Bei ausreichender Erfahrung des Operateurs lassen sich heute die meisten Fälle arthroskopisch behandeln. Bei dieser minimal-invasiven Technik sind die Risiken gering. Neben der Reduktion des Pfannenrandes sind eine Refixation des Labrums und eine Sanierung von Knorpeldefekten technisch möglich geworden. Gleichzeitig können Pathologien am proximalen Femur angegangen werden. Die Erfolgsraten sind bei frühzeitiger Operation hoch, sinken jedoch mit zunehmenden Knorpelschäden. Entsprechend ist bei Hüftbeschwerden des jungen Patienten eine frühzeitige Diagnostik dringend indiziert.

Abstract

Background

In pincer impingement of the hip repetitive contusions between the acetabular rim and the femoral neck will initially cause lesions to occur in the labrum and eventually in the acetabular cartilage. Without appropriate treatment in an early stage, development of early onset osteoarthritis should be expected. For this particular topic the treatment of choice is surgery which was originally carried out by conventional open surgery, often in combination with dislocation of the hip as the standard procedure.

Objectives

This article presents the strategy for early diagnosis and the current role of hip arthroscopy in the treatment of femoroacetabular pincer impingement.

Methods

This study is based on a selective literature research and the author’s experience.

Results

Clinical examination and selective x-ray protocols, including magnetic resonance imaging arthrography (arthro-MRI) will give a clear diagnosis, even in early stages of the disease. Analysis of the literature shows that therapy can be carried out arthroscopically.

Conclusions

Depending on the level of surgical experience most cases can be treated arthroscopically which is a low risk and minimally invasive procedure. The arthroscopic technique not only allows trimming of the acetabular rim but also labral reconstruction and cartilage repair. In addition other pathologies of the proximal femur may be addressed at the same time. The overall success rates are high if therapy is carried out at an early stage of the disease; however, clinical outcome is less favorable with advanced stages of chondromalacia at the time of intervention. Under this aspect, an early and careful diagnostic work-up for hip pain is of particular importance especially in young and active patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6

Literatur

  1. Aditya VM, Aamer M, Dorr LD (2007) Impingement oft he native hip joint – current concept review. J Bone Joint Surg 89-A:2508–2518

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson LA, Peters CL, Park BB et al (2009) Acetabular cartilage delamination in femuroacetabular impingement. J Bone Joint Surg 91-A:305–313

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beck M, Leunig M, Parvizi J et al (2004) Anterior femoroacetabular impingement – part II: midterm results of surgical treatment. Clin Orthop 418:67–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bedi A, Kelly BT, Khanduja V (2013) Arthroscopic hip preservation surgery. Bone Joint J 95-B:10–19

    Google Scholar 

  5. Burmann MS (1931) Arthroscopy or the direct visualisation of joints. J Bone Joint Surg 4:669–695

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clohisy JC, Carlisle JC, Baulé PE et al (2008) A systematic approach to the plain radiographic evaluation of the young adult hip. J Bone Joint Surg 90-A(Suppl 4):47–66

  7. Dienst M, Grün U (2008) Komplikationen bei arthroskopischen Hüftoperationen. Orthopäde 11:1108–1115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dora C, Leunig M, Beck M et al (2006) Acetabular dome retroversion: radiological appearance, incidence and relevance. Hip Int 16(3):215–222

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Drehmann F (1979) A clinical examination method in epiphyseolysis. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 117:333–334

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Espinosa N, Rothenfluh DA, Beck M et al (2006) Treatment of femuroacetabular impingement: preliminary results of labral refixation. J Bone Joint Surg 88-A(5):925–935

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fadul AD, Carrino JA (2009) Imaging of femoroacetabular impingement. J Bone Joint Surg 91-A(Suppl 1):138–143

  12. Ganz R, Gill TJ, Gautier E et al (2001) Surgical dislocation of the adult hip. J Bone Joint Surg 83-B:1119–1124

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M et al (2003) Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin orthop Relat Res 417:112–120

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Haddad FS, Konan S (2013) Femoroacetabular impingement – not just a square peg in a round hole. J Bone Joint Surg 95-B:1297–1298

    Google Scholar 

  15. Horisberger M, Brunner A, Herzog R (2010) Arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement of the hip – a new technique to access the joint. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:182–190

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ilizaturri VM, Byrd JWT, Sampson TG et al (2008) A geographic zone method to describe intra-articular pathology in hip arthroscopy: cadaveric study and preliminary report. Arthroscopy 24(5):534–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jayasekera N, Aprato A, Villar RN (2013) Are crutches required after hip arthroscopy? – a case-control study. Hip Int 23(3):269–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Klaue K, Durnin CW, Ganz R (1991) The acetabular rim syndrom. J Bone Joint Surg 73-B:423–429

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kubiak-Langer M, Tannast M, Murphy SB et al (2007) Range of motion in anterior femuroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 458:117–124

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lavigne M, Parvizi J, Beck M et al (2004) Anterior femuroacetabular impingement – part I: techniques of joint preserving surgery. Clin Orthop 418:61–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. MacDonald SJ, Garbuz D, Ganz R (1997) Clinical evaluation of the symptomatic young adult hip. Semin Arthroplasty 8:3–9

    Google Scholar 

  22. Matinez AE, Li SM, Ganz R, Beck M (2006) Os acetabuli in femoro-acetabular impingement: stress fracture or unfused secondary ossification centre of the acetabular rim? Hip Int 16(4):281–286

    Google Scholar 

  23. Matsuda DK (2009) Acute iatrogenic dislocation following hip impingement arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopy 25(4):400–404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. McCarthy JC (2005) Hip arthroscopy: indications, outcomes and complications – an ICL AAOS. J Bone Joint Surg 87-A(5):1138–1145

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ali AM, Teh J, Whitwell D, Ostlere S (2013) Ischiofemoral impingement – a retrospective analysis of cases in a specialist orthopaedic centre over a four-year period. Hip Int 23(3):263–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Philippon MJ, Briggs KK, Yen YM, Kuppersmith DA (2009) Outcomes following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement with associated chondrolabral dysfunction: minimum two-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg 91-B(1):16–23

    Google Scholar 

  27. Philippon MJ, Wolff AB, Briggs KK et al (2010) Acetabular rim reduction for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement correlates with preoperative and postoperative center-edge angle. Arthroscopy 26(6):757–761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Reynolds D, Lucas J, Klaue K (1999) Retroversion of the acetabulum. J Bone Joint Surg 81-B:281–288

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schilders E, Dimitrakopoulou A, Bismil Q et al (2011) Arthroscopic treatment of labral tears in femoroacetabular impingement: a comparative study of refixation und resection with a minimum two-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg 93-B:1027–1032

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schmid MR, Nötzli HP, Zanetti M et al (2003) Cartilage lesions in the hip: diagnostic effectiveness of MR arthrography. Radiology 226:382–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Siebenrock KA, Schoeniger R, Ganz R (2003) Anterior femoro-acetabular impingement due to acetabular retroversion – treatment with periacetabular osteotomy. J Bone Joint Surg 85-A:278–286

    Google Scholar 

  32. Tannast M, Siebenrock K (2007) European instructional course. Lectures 8:123–133

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt. R.F. Herzog gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Dieser Beitrag enthält keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R.F. Herzog.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Herzog, R. Femoroacetabuläres Pincer-Impingement. Arthroskopie 27, 109–117 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00142-013-0781-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00142-013-0781-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation