English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background:   The labrum is likely to influence impingement, which may also depend on acetabular coverage. Simulating impingement using 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) is a potential solution to evaluating range of motion (ROM); however, it is based on bony structures rather than on soft tissue.Purpose:   To examine ROM when the labrum is considered in a 3D dynamic simulation. A particular focus was evaluation of maximum flexion and internal rotation angles before occurrence of impingement, comparing them in cases of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH).Study Design:   Descriptive laboratory study.Methods:   Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and CT scans of 40 hips (20 with cam-type FAI and 20 with BDDH) were reviewed retrospectively. The thickness and width of the labrum were measured on MRI scans. A virtual labrum was reconstructed based on patient-specific sizes measured on MRI scans. The impingement point was identified using 3D dynamic simulation and was compared with the internal rotation angle before and after labral reconstruction.Results:   The thickness and width of the labrum were significantly larger in BDDH than in FAI ( P &lt; .001). In FAI, the maximum internal rotation angles without the labrum were 30.3° at 90° of flexion and 56.9° at 45° of flexion, with these values decreasing to 18.7° and 41.4°, respectively, after labral reconstruction ( P &lt; .001). In BDDH, the maximum internal rotation angles were 48.0° at 90° of flexion and 76.7° at 45° of flexion without the labrum, decreasing to 31.1° and 55.3°, respectively, after labral reconstruction ( P &lt; .001). The differences in the angles before and after labral reconstruction were larger in BDDH than in FAI (90° of flexion, P = .03; 45° of flexion, P = .01).Conclusion:   As the labrum was significantly more hypertrophic in BDDH than in FAI, the virtual labral model revealed that the labrum’s interference with the maximum internal rotation angle was also significantly larger in BDDH.Clinical Relevance:   The labrum has a significant effect on impingement; this is more significant for BDDH than for FAI.

Use of a 3D Virtually Reconstructed Patient-Specific Model to Examine the Effect of Acetabular Labral Interference on Hip Range of Motion