Advertisement

La radiologia medica

, Volume 122, Issue 3, pp 208–214 | Cite as

Incidence of greater trochanteric pain syndrome in patients suspected for femoroacetabular impingement evaluated using magnetic resonance arthrography of the hip

  • Grazia Pozzi
  • Ezio LanzaEmail author
  • Cleber Garcia Parra
  • Ilaria Merli
  • Luca Maria Sconfienza
  • Alberto Zerbi
MUSCULOSKELETAL RADIOLOGY

Abstract

Objectives:

We evaluated the incidence of greater trochanter pain syndrome (GTPS) in patients who underwent magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) of the hip for a suspected femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome.

Methods:

Hip MRA performed at our institution (3/2012–1/2014) were reviewed. The absence/presence of FAI (cam, pincer, and mixed) was noted. GTPS diagnosis was based on gluteus medius/minimus tendinopathy/tears, trochanteric bursitis, fascia lata thickening, and trochanter bone oedema/erosion. Subgroup analysis for age (under/over 40 years) and FAI type (cam, pincer, and mixed) was also performed.

Results:

N = 189 patients were included (n = 125 males; age 39 ± 12 years). FAI was diagnosed in n = 133 (70, 4%): cam type, n = 85 (63, 9%); pincer type, n = 22 (16, 6%); and mixed type, n = 26 (19, 5%). N = 72 patients (38.1%) had tendinopathy, n = 14 (7.4%) had trochanter erosion, n = 31 (16.4%) had bursitis, n = 4 had bone oedema (2.1%), and n = 3 (1.6%) had fascia lata thickening, resulting in GTPS diagnosis in n = 74 patients (39.2%). The association of normal hip morphology/GTPS was significantly higher (P = 0.023) than that of FAI/GTPS. Under 40 years, GTPS incidence was higher in patients with normal hip and pincer-type FAI (P = 0.028). Over 40 years, no difference between patients with/without FAI (P = 0.119) was seen.

Conclusions:

GTPS was more frequently observed in patients with normal hip morphology than in patients with FAI, particularly in patients under 40.

Keywords

Hip Magnetic resonance arthrography Femoroacetabular impingement Greater trochanter pain syndrome Trochanteric bursitis 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional and/or National Research Committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the study, which involves no risk for the participants, could not practicably be carried out without the waiver and does not adversely affect the rights and welfare of the participants.

References

  1. 1.
    Ito K, Leunig M, Ganz R (2004) Histopathologic features of the acetabular labrum in femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 429:262–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beck M, Kalhor M, Leunig M, Ganz R (2005) Hip morphology influences the pattern of damage to the acetabular cartilage: femoroacetabular impingement as a cause of early osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Jt Surg Br 87:1012–1018. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B7.15203 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000096804.78689.c2 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Byrd JWT (2010) Femoroacetabular impingement in athletes, part 1: cause and assessment. Sports Health 2:321–333. doi: 10.1177/1941738110368392 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hack K, Di Primio G, Rakhra K, Beaulé PE (2010) Prevalence of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement morphology in asymptomatic volunteers. J Bone Jt Surg Am 92:2436–2444. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01280 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pfirrmann CWA, Mengiardi B, Dora C et al (2006) Cam and pincer femoroacetabular impingement: characteristic MR arthrographic findings in 50 patients. Radiology 240:778–785. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2403050767 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tannast M, Siebenrock KA, Anderson SE (2007) Femoroacetabular impingement: radiographic diagnosis—what the radiologist should know. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:1540–1552. doi: 10.2214/AJR.06.0921 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aliprandi A, Di Pietto F, Minafra P et al (2014) Femoro-acetabular impingement: what the general radiologist should know. Radiol Med 119:103–112. doi: 10.1007/s11547-013-0314-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson SE, Siebenrock KA, Tannast M (2012) Femoroacetabular impingement. Eur J Radiol 81:3740–3744. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.03.097 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sink EL, Gralla J, Ryba A, Dayton M (2008) Clinical presentation of femoroacetabular impingement in adolescents. J Pediatr Orthop 28:806–811. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0b013e31818e194f CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clohisy JC, Carlisle JC, Trousdale R et al (2009) Radiographic evaluation of the hip has limited reliability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:666–675. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0626-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lequesne M, Mathieu P, Vuillemin-Bodaghi V et al (2008) Gluteal tendinopathy in refractory greater trochanter pain syndrome: diagnostic value of two clinical tests. Arthritis Rheum 59:241–246. doi: 10.1002/art.23354 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bywaters EG (1965) The bursae of the body. Ann Rheum Dis 24:215–218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shbeeb MI, Matteson EL (1996) Trochanteric bursitis (greater trochanter pain syndrome). Mayo Clin Proc 71:565–569. doi: 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)64113-X CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beaulé PE, Beaulé PE, Rakhra K (2010) Cam-type FAI: is the alpha angle the best MR arthrography has to offer? (Skelet Radiol 2009;38(9):855–62). Skelet Radiol 39:201–202. doi: 10.1007/s00256-009-0836-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kingzett-Taylor A, Tirman PF, Feller J et al (1999) Tendinosis and tears of gluteus medius and minimus muscles as a cause of hip pain: MR imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:1123–1126. doi: 10.2214/ajr.173.4.10511191 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reichenbach S, Jüni P, Werlen S et al (2010) Prevalence of cam-type deformity on hip magnetic resonance imaging in young males: a cross-sectional study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 62:1319–1327. doi: 10.1002/acr.20198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lequesne M (2006) From “periarthritis” to hip “rotator cuff” tears. Trochanteric tendinobursitis. Jt Bone Spine 73:344–348. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2006.04.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tortolani PJ, Carbone JJ, Quartararo LG (2002) Greater trochanteric pain syndrome in patients referred to orthopedic spine specialists. Spine J 2:251–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McEvoy JR, Lee KS, Blankenbaker DG et al (2013) Ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections for treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome: greater trochanter bursa versus subgluteus medius bursa. AJR Am J Roentgenol 201:W313–W317. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.9443 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    May DA, Disler DG, Jones EA et al (2000) Abnormal signal intensity in skeletal muscle at MR imaging: patterns, pearls, and pitfalls. Radiographics 20:S295–S315. doi: 10.1148/radiographics.20.suppl_1.g00oc18s295 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Williams BS, Cohen SP (2009) Greater trochanteric pain syndrome: a review of anatomy, diagnosis and treatment. Anesth Analg 108:1662–1670. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e31819d6562 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stegemann H (1923) Die chirurgische bedevtung paraartikularer kalkablagerungen. Arch Klin Chir 125(718):38Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dunn T, Heller CA, McCarthy SW, Dos Remedios C (2003) Anatomical study of the “trochanteric bursa”. Clin Anat 16:233–240. doi: 10.1002/ca.10084 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Johnston CA, Wiley JP, Lindsay DM, Wiseman DA (1998) Iliopsoas bursitis and tendinitis. A Rev Sports Med 25:271–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Blankenbaker DG, Ullrick SR, Davis KW et al (2008) Correlation of MRI findings with clinical findings of trochanteric pain syndrome. Skelet Radiol 37:903–909. doi: 10.1007/s00256-008-0514-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kong A, Van der Vliet A, Zadow S (2007) MRI and US of gluteal tendinopathy in greater trochanteric pain syndrome. Eur Radiol 17:1772–1783. doi: 10.1007/s00330-006-0485-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sutter R, Zanetti M, Pfirrmann CWA (2012) New developments in hip imaging. Radiology 264:651–667. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12110357 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kang ACL, Gooding AJ, Coates MH et al (2010) Computed tomography assessment of hip joints in asymptomatic individuals in relation to femoroacetabular impingement. Am J Sports Med 38:1160–1165. doi: 10.1177/0363546509358320 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Society of Medical Radiology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Grazia Pozzi
    • 1
  • Ezio Lanza
    • 2
    Email author
  • Cleber Garcia Parra
    • 3
  • Ilaria Merli
    • 4
  • Luca Maria Sconfienza
    • 1
    • 5
  • Alberto Zerbi
    • 1
  1. 1.Unità Operativa di Radiologia/Diagnostica per Immagini con Servizio di Radiologia InterventisticaIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico GaleazziMilanItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di RadiologiaIRCCS Humanitas Research HospitalRozzanoItaly
  3. 3.Unità di Ortopedia e TraumatologiaASST-Papa Giovanni XXIIIBergamoItaly
  4. 4.Scuola di Specializzazione in RadiodiagnosticaUniversità degli Studi di MilanoMilanItaly
  5. 5.Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la SaluteUniversità degli Studi di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations