FP1.6 How much do functional and anatomical acetabular coverage indices differ when standing in adults with hip pain?

Clicks: 13
ID: 330915
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #50 of 444 articles by views in Journal of hip preservation surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 444 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract ICLB01 - The Instability Masterclass: Correcting Bone, Biology, and Bad Outcomes, Session Room 6 (BMCC Level 3), October 8, 2026, 10:30 - 12:30 Background Acetabular coverage is traditionally assessed using the lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) and acetabular index (AI). However, functional coverage evaluation with standing radiographs is influenced by coronal plane pelvic obliquity (PO), which may alter acetabular coverage measurements. Questions/Purposes This study therefore addressed the following questions: (1) What is the magnitude and direction of PO in a unilaterally symptomatic young-adult hip population? (2) How do functional (horizontal-referenced) and anatomical (inter-teardrop-referenced) LCEA and AI compare in symptomatic hips? (3) What is the effect of PO magnitude and direction on differences between functional and anatomical acetabular coverage indices in the symptomatic hip? Patients and Methods In this retrospective, consecutive, cohort study, 493 patients with unilateral hip pathology who underwent standing anteroposterior pelvic radiography were included. In each hip, LCEA and AI were measured using functional (horizontal-referenced; fLCEA, fAI) and anatomical (inter-teardrop-referenced; aLCEA, aAI) measurement indices. PO was defined as the angle between the inter-teardrop line and the horizontal reference line. Differences between constructs were quantified as ΔLCEA and ΔAI (anatomical minus functional). Coverage reclassification represented discordance between indices across LCEA (<20°, 20°-25°, 25°-40°, >40°) and AI (<0°, 0°-10°, >10°) categories. Results Mean PO magnitude was 1.54° ± 1.21° (0°–6°); 197/493 (40.0%) hips had PO 2° to <5°, and 14/493 (2.8%) had PO ≥5°. Mean ΔLCEA and ΔAI magnitude were 1.62° ± 1.27° and 1.63° ± 1.27°. Each 1° increase in PO magnitude increased ΔLCEA magnitude by 0.89° (95% CI, 0.86–0.93; p < 0.001; R2 = 0.86) and ΔAI magnitude by 0.90° (95% CI, 0.87–0.93; p < 0.001; R2 = 0.88). PO magnitude and direction altered acetabular coverage relative to aLCEA and aAI, leading to acetabular coverage reclassification in 69/493 (14.0%) symptomatic hips for LCEA when assessed functionally. Conclusions Functional and anatomical indices therefore yield discordant coverage estimates and have the potential to reclassify acetabular coverage. As standing radiographs are increasingly used to depict coverage under weight-bearing conditions, functional indices may be particularly informative with important implications in patients with mild deformity.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220356520 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Riley Cousins, Moritz Wagner, Megha Rao, Stephanie Y. Pun, Kevin M. Smit, Paul E. Beaulé, George A. Grammatopoulos
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of hip preservation surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jhps/hnag043.006
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnag043.006
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.