Advertisement

Skeletal Radiology

, Volume 46, Issue 3, pp 299–308 | Cite as

Accuracy of non-arthrographic 3T MR imaging in evaluation of intra-articular pathology of the hip in femoroacetabular impingement

  • Dorota D. LindaEmail author
  • Ali Naraghi
  • Lucas Murnaghan
  • Daniel Whelan
  • Lawrence M. White
Scientific Article

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the accuracy of non-arthrographic 3-T MRI compared to hip arthroscopy in the assessment of labral and cartilaginous pathology in patients with suspected FAI.

Materials and methods

Following IRB approval and waived consent, 42 consecutive cases of suspected FAI with non-arthrographic 3-T MRI and arthroscopy of the hip were reviewed. High-resolution TSE MR imaging was evaluated in consensus by two musculoskeletal radiologists, blinded to arthroscopic findings, for the presence of labral tears and articular cartilage lesions. Acetabular cartilage was categorized as normal, degeneration/fissuring, delamination, or denudation. MRI findings were compared to arthroscopy. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and predictive values for MRI were calculated using arthroscopy as the standard of reference.

Results

Forty-two hips in 38 patients with a mean age of 29 (range 13–45 years) were assessed. Mean interval between MRI and arthroscopy was 154 days (range 27–472 days). MRI depicted 41 cases with labral tears (sensitivity 100%, specificity 50%, accuracy 98%, PPV 98%, NPV 100%), 11 cases with femoral cartilage abnormalities (sensitivity 85%, specificity 100%, accuracy 95%, PPV 100%, NPV 94%), and 36 cases with acetabular cartilage lesions (sensitivity 94% specificity 67%, accuracy 90%, PPV 94%, NPV 67%). Of the 36 cases with acetabular cartilage lesions on MRI, 7 were characterized as degeneration/fissuring, 26 as delamination, and 3 as denudation, with discordant results between MRI and arthroscopy for grading of articular cartilage in ten cases.

Conclusion

Non-arthrographic 3-T MR imaging is a highly accurate technique for evaluation of the labrum and cartilage in patients with clinically suspected FAI.

Keywords

Femoroacetabular impingement Hip Magnetic resonance imaging Acetabular labrum Cartilage 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Imam S, Khanduja V. Current concepts in the diagnosis and management of femoroacetabular impingement. Int Orthop Springer-Verlag. 2011;35:1427–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grant AD, Sala DA, Davidovitch RI. The labrum: structure, function, and injury with femoro-acetabular impingement. J Child Orthop Springer-Verlag. 2012;6:357–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smith TO, Hilton G, Toms AP, Donell ST, Hing CB. The diagnostic accuracy of acetabular labral tears using magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol Springer-Verlag. 2011;21:863–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pfirrmann CWA, Mengiardi B, Dora C, Kalberer F, Zanetti M, Hodler J. Cam and pincer femoroacetabular impingement: characteristic MR arthrographic findings in 50 patients. Radiology. 2006;240:778–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blankenbaker DG, Tuite MJ. Acetabular labrum. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2013;21:21–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pfirrmann CWA, Duc SR, Zanetti M, Dora C, Hodler J. MR arthrography of acetabular cartilage delamination in femoroacetabular cam impingement. Radiology. 2008;249:236–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kubo T, Horii M, Harada Y, Noguchi Y, Yutani Y, Ohashi H, et al. Radial-sequence magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of acetabular labrum. J Orthop Sci. 1999;4:328–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Plötz GM, Brossmann J, von Knoch M, Muhle C, Heller M, Hassenpflug J. Magnetic resonance arthrography of the acetabular labrum: value of radial reconstructions. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2001;121:450–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tannast M, Goricki D, Beck M, Murphy SB, Siebenrock KA. Hip damage occurs at the zone of femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res Springer-Verlag. 2008;466:273–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M, Leunig M, Nötzli H, Siebenrock KA. Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; 112–20.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Riley GM, McWalter EJ, Stevens KJ, Safran MR, Lattanzi R, Gold GE. MRI of the hip for the evaluation of femoroacetabular impingement; past, present, and future. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41:558–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Potter HG, Schachar J. High resolution noncontrast MRI of the hip. J Magn Reson Imag Wiley Subscription Services, Inc A Wiley Company. 2010;31:268–78.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lohan DG, Seeger LL, Motamedi K, Hame S, Sayre J. Cam-type femoral-acetabular impingement: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer? Skeletal Radiol Springer-Verlag. 2009;38:855–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nouh MR, Schweitzer ME, Rybak L, Cohen J. Femoroacetabular impingement: can the alpha angle be estimated? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:1260–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heil KM, Wood AM, Penn-Barwell J, Keenan ACM, McKie S. Femoral acetabular impingement: the sex- and age-linked distribution of alpha angles in 146 patients of service age without pre-existing osteoarthritic or other hip pathology. J R Nav Med Serv. 2013;99:111–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rakhra KS, Sheikh AM, Allen D, Beaulé PE. Comparison of MRI alpha angle measurement planes in femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res Springer-Verlag. 2009;467:660–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mintz DN, Hooper T, Connell D, Buly R, Padgett DE, Potter HG. Magnetic resonance imaging of the hip: detection of labral and chondral abnormalities using noncontrast imaging. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:385–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sutter R, Zubler V, Hoffmann A, Mamisch-Saupe N, Dora C, Kalberer F, et al. Hip MRI: how useful is intraarticular contrast material for evaluating surgically proven lesions of the labrum and articular cartilage? Am J Roentgenol Am Roentgen Ray Soc. 2013;202:160–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zlatkin MB, Pevsner D, Sanders TG, Hancock CR, Ceballos CE, Herrera MF. Acetabular labral tears and cartilage lesions of the hip: indirect MR arthrographic correlation with arthroscopy—a preliminary study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:709–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sundberg TP, Toomayan GA, Major NM. Evaluation of the acetabular labrum at 3.0-T MR imaging compared with 1.5-T MR arthrography: preliminary experience. Radiology. 2006;238:706–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Petchprapa CN, Rybak LD, Dunham KS, Lattanzi R, Recht MP. Labral and cartilage abnormalities in young patients with hip pain: accuracy of 3-Tesla indirect MR arthrography. Skeletal Radiol. 2015;44:97–105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tian C-Y, Wang J-Q, Zheng Z-Z, Ren A-H. 3.0 T conventional hip MR and hip MR arthrography for the acetabular labral tears confirmed by arthroscopy. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:1822–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Klein GR, Purtill JJ. Hip arthroscopy: indications and technique. Semin Arthroplast. 2005;16:63–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chan Y-S, Lien L-C, Hsu H-L, Wan Y-L, Lee MSS, Hsu K-Y, et al. Evaluating hip labral tears using magnetic resonance arthrography: a prospective study comparing hip arthroscopy and magnetic resonance arthrography diagnosis. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:1250–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yamamoto Y, Tonotsuka H, Ueda T, Hamada Y. Usefulness of radial contrast-enhanced computed tomography for the diagnosis of acetabular labrum injury. Arthroscopy. 2007;23:1290–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kivlan BR, Martin RL, Sekiya JK. Response to diagnostic injection in patients with femoroacetabular impingement, labral tears, chondral lesions, and extra-articular pathology. Arthroscopy. 2011;27:619–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Byrd JWT, Jones KS. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical assessment, magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance arthrography, and intra-articular injection in hip arthroscopy patients. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32:1668–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Toomayan GA, Holman WR, Major NM, Kozlowicz SM, Vail TP. Sensitivity of MR arthrography in the evaluation of acetabular labral tears. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:449–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dorota D. Linda
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ali Naraghi
    • 1
  • Lucas Murnaghan
    • 3
  • Daniel Whelan
    • 3
  • Lawrence M. White
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medical Imaging, Joint Department of Medical Imaging, Division of Musculoskeletal ImagingUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Mount Sinai HospitalTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Department of Surgery, Division of OrthopedicsUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations