3D-MRI versus 3D-CT in the evaluation of osseous anatomy in femoroacetabular impingement using Dixon 3D FLASH sequence
To determine if hip 3D-MR imaging can be used to accurately demonstrate femoral and acetabular morphology in the evaluation of patients with femoroacetabular impingement.
Materials and methods
We performed a retrospective review at our institution of 17 consecutive patients (19 hips) with suspected femoroacetabular impingement who had both 3D-CT and 3D-MRI performed of the same hip. Two fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologists reviewed the imaging for the presence and location of cam deformity, anterior–inferior iliac spine variant, lateral center-edge angle, and neck–shaft angle. Findings on 3D-CT were considered the reference standard. The amount of radiation that was spared following introduction of 3D-MRI was also assessed.
All 17 patients suspected of FAI had evidence for cam deformity on 3D-CT. There was 100% agreement for diagnosis (19 out of 19) and location (19 out of 19) of cam deformity when comparing 3D-MRI with 3D-CT. There were 3 type I and 16 type II anterior–inferior iliac spine variants on 3D-CT imaging with 89.5% (17 out of 19) agreement for the anterior–inferior iliac spine characterization between 3D-MRI and 3D-CT. There was 64.7% agreement when comparing the neck–shaft angle (11 out of 17) and LCEA (11 out of 17) measurements. The use of 3D-MRI spared each patient an average radiation effective dose of 3.09 mSV for a total reduction of 479 mSV over a 4-year period.
3D-MR imaging can be used to accurately diagnose and quantify the typical osseous pathological condition in femoroacetabular impingement and has the potential to eliminate the need for 3D-CT imaging and its associated radiation exposure, and the cost for this predominantly young group of patients.
KeywordsFemoroacetabular impingement 3D MRI 3D CT
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Institutional review board
Institutional review board approval was obtained.
- 5.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;(417):112–20.Google Scholar
- 6.Siebenrock KA, Wahab KHA, Werlen S, Kalhor M, Leunig M, Ganz R. Abnormal extension of the femoral head epiphysis as a cause of cam impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(418):54–60.Google Scholar
- 7.Murphy S, Tannast M, Kim Y-J, Buly R, Millis MB. Debridement of the adult hip for femoroacetabular impingement: indications and preliminary clinical results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(429):178–81.Google Scholar
- 8.Tanzer M, Noiseux N. Osseous abnormalities and early osteoarthritis: the role of hip impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(429):170–7.Google Scholar
- 11.Tönnis D. Normal values of the hip joint for the evaluation of X-rays in children and adults. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;(119):39–47.Google Scholar
- 17.Nishihara S, Sugano N, Nishii T, Ohzono K, Yoshikawa H. Measurements of pelvic flexion angle using three-dimensional computed tomography. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;(411):140–51.Google Scholar
- 42.Cadet ER, Babatunde OM, Gorroochurn P, Chan AK, Stancato-Pasik A, Brown M, et al. Inter- and intra-observer agreement of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) parameters comparing plain radiographs and advanced, 3D computed tomographic (CT)-generated hip models in a surgical patient cohort. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24:2324–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar