Inter-observer concordance in normal and pathological findings of the hip joint in plain radiographs.

Main Article Content

Maria Giovanna Atria
Marco Calvi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1458-568X
Giada Zorzetto
Marco Curti https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0903-6558
Angelica Celentano
Marta Duvia
Massimo Venturini https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2983-8328
Eugenio Annibale Genovese https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0276-3602

Keywords

plain radiography, hip joint, FAI, agreement

Abstract

Background and aim: The purpose of the study was to compare the data obtained by two independent observers and statistically analyze the results using Cohen’s K to highlight the concordance or discordance in the diagnosis of normality, pathology and, in particular, the type of femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI) on plain films.


Methods: the study was conducted retrospectively. The only inclusion criterium was the minimum age of 20 years. All patients underwent a radiographic examination of the pelvis in standard anteroposterior projection in orthostasis.


Results: A good concordance between the two operators in the examination of normal hip joint (k= 0.68 right/ 0,74 left) was found; a similar grade of agreement was found for the analysis of “pincer” type FAI (k = 0.73 right, 0,67 left). The best results in concordance were achieved in the examination of “cam” type FAI (k= 0.82 right, 0,88 left), “mixed” type FAI (k = 0.85 right, 0,86 left), and in findings of “coxa profunda” (k = 0.92 right, 0,88 left).


Conclusion: We found a good concordance between the two readers; a few cases of disagreement were found in the diagnosis of "pincer" type FAI and absence of disease. This discrepancy may be due to the different weight given by the single observer to the clinical indication that leads the patient to examination, but also by the difficulty of a not dedicated radiologist to show some subtle signs indicative of early FAI.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 62 |

References

1. Genovese E, Spiga S, Vinci V, Aliprandi A, Di Pietto F, Coppolino F, et al. Femoroacetabular impingement: role of imaging. Musculoskelet Surg. 2013 Aug;97(S2):117–26.
2. Mascarenhas VV, Castro MO, Rego PA, Sutter R, Sconfienza LM, Kassarjian A, et al. The Lisbon Agreement on Femoroacetabular Impingement Imaging—part 1: overview. Eur Radiol. 2020 Oct;30(10):5281–97.
3. Leunig M, Beaulé PE, Ganz R. The Concept of Femoroacetabular Impingement: Current Status and Future Perspectives. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 2009 Mar;467(3):616–22.
4. Kappe T, Kocak T, Neuerburg C, Lippacher S, Bieger R, Reichel H. Reliability of radiographic signs for acetabular retroversion. Int Orthop. 2011 Jun;35(6):817–21.
5. Laborie LB, Lehmann TG, Engesæter IØ, Eastwood DM, Engesæter LB, Rosendahl K. Prevalence of radiographic findings thought to be associated with femoroacetabular impingement in a population-based cohort of 2081 healthy young adults. Radiology. 2011 Aug;260(2):494–502.
6. Griffin DR, Dickenson EJ, O’Donnell J, Agricola R, Awan T, Beck M, et al. The Warwick Agreement on femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI syndrome): an international consensus statement. Br J Sports Med. 2016 Oct;50(19):1169–76.
7. Weir A, Brukner P, Delahunt E, Ekstrand J, Griffin D, Khan KM, et al. Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes. Br J Sports Med. 2015 Jun;49(12):768–74.
8. Sankar WN, Nevitt M, Parvizi J, Felson DT, Agricola R, Leunig M. Femoroacetabular impingement: defining the condition and its role in the pathophysiology of osteoarthritis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013;21 Suppl 1:S7–15.
9. Beall DP, Sweet CF, Martin HD, Lastine CL, Grayson DE, Ly JQ, et al. Imaging findings of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Skeletal Radiol. 2005 Nov;34(11):691–701.
10. Leunig M, Beck M, Kalhor M, Kim Y-J, Werlen S, Ganz R. Fibrocystic changes at anterosuperior femoral neck: prevalence in hips with femoroacetabular impingement. Radiology. 2005 Jul;236(1):237–46.
11. Nötzli HP, Wyss TF, Stoecklin CH, Schmid MR, Treiber K, Hodler J. The contour of the femoral head-neck junction as a predictor for the risk of anterior impingement. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British volume. 2002 May;84-B(4):556–60.
12. Sutter R, Zanetti M, Pfirrmann CWA. New developments in hip imaging. Radiology. 2012 Sep;264(3):651–67.
13. Frank JM, Harris JD, Erickson BJ, Slikker W, Bush-Joseph CA, Salata MJ, et al. Prevalence of Femoroacetabular Impingement Imaging Findings in Asymptomatic Volunteers: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy. 2015 Jun;31(6):1199–204.
14. Gutiérrez-Ramos R, Ávalos-Calderón SA, Bahena-Peniche LA. [Prevalence of X-ray signs of femoroacetabular impingement in Mexican population]. Acta Ortop Mex. 2017 Jun;31(3):134–40.
15. Lerch TD, Siegfried M, Schmaranzer F, Leibold CS, Zurmühle CA, Hanke MS, et al. Location of Intra- and Extra-articular Hip Impingement Is Different in Patients With Pincer-Type and Mixed-Type Femoroacetabular Impingement Due to Acetabular Retroversion or Protrusio Acetabuli on 3D CT-Based Impingement Simulation. Am J Sports Med. 2020 Mar;48(3):661–72.

Most read articles by the same author(s)