Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome
Citation, DOI, disclosures and article data
At the time the article was created Roberto Schubert had no recorded disclosures.View Roberto Schubert's current disclosures
At the time the article was last revised Joshua Yap had no recorded disclosures.View Joshua Yap's current disclosures
Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome is the clinical symptoms and signs of painful, limited hip motion resulting from certain types of underlying morphological abnormalities in the femoral head-neck region and/or acetabulum. Femoroacetabular impingement can lead to early degenerative disease.
On this page:
Femoroacetabular impingement is common in active young and middle-aged adult individuals, with pincer morphology being more common in middle-aged women and cam morphology more common in young men 1,2.
high impact sport activity, especially in adolescence during physeal closure
previous slipped capital femoral epiphysis or Perthes disease
Given the widespread prevalence of cam and/or pincer morphology in the asymptomatic population, the diagnosis of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome is reliant on positive symptoms and clinical examination signs in addition to imaging findings of a femoroacetabular impingement morphology 24.
Patients usually present with motion or position related to hip and/or groin pain e.g. a painfully restricted range of motion during hip flexion, internal rotation and adduction. Sometimes the pain is also described in the buttock, back or thigh and in addition, there may be symptoms of stiffness, clicking, locking, catching 2.
A common clinical test for femoroacetabular impingement is the FADIR (flexion, adduction, internal rotation) test, which is sensitive but not specific 2.
Femoroacetabular impingement is an intra-articular or internal form of impingement, where structural changes combined with dynamic factors as repetitive abnormal contact of the acetabulum and the femoral head-neck junction lead to mechanical stress and shear forces on the labrum and chondral surfaces and subsequent damage 1-4.
The etiology of cam and pincer morphology comprises primary (idiopathic) and secondary (developmental, traumatic and iatrogenic) causes 3.
Two basic structural factors or subtypes of the femoroacetabular morphology have been identified, which can lead to femoroacetabular impingement either alone or in combination:
cam-type: the loss of sphericity leads to shear forces at the chondrolabral junction during hip flexion and internal rotation which can then lead to chondrolabral separation and chondral delamination typically in the anterosuperior aspect of the acetabulum 2
pincer type: focal or global acetabular over-coverage can lead to labral compression and chondral wear at the site of impingement also frequently anterosuperiorly with concomitant chondral injury posteroinferiorly as a contrecoup lesion as a long-term sequel
mixed type: a combination of the two morphologies
The morphological change in cam morphology is situated at the femoral head-neck junction, most often in the anterosuperior position lateral to the physeal scar with decreased femoral head-neck offset 1,3.
Acetabular over-coverage in pincer morphology can be global or focal and concerns the acetabular rim, focal acetabular overcoverage can be anywhere but most often is also located anterosuperior due to acetabular retroversion, posterior wall prominence and os acetabuli being other forms of focal overcoverage 1.
Labral injuries and tears are most frequently located at the most prominent site of cam and/or pincer morphology, which is most frequently at the anterosuperior portion of the acetabular rim. Chondral contrecoup lesions in the case of pincer morphology are often found posteroinferiorly 1.
For initial evaluation of the acetabulum plain radiographs of the pelvis are recommended and an additional view of the femoral neck such as Dunn views, cross-table lateral, frog-leg lateral or Meyer lateral for the assessment of the femoral head-neck junction 2.
Cross-sectional imaging is advised for better characterization, the detection of chondral and labral lesions and preoperative planning 2,3.
The plain anterior-posterior radiograph of the pelvis can be evaluated for the following radiographic signs of cam and/or pincer morphology. It must be acquired with neutral tilt, centered on the pubic symphysis since some of those signs will be falsely positive or negative depending on increasing tilt and rotation 1,6-9:
lateral center-edge angle, acetabular index: to confirm acetabular overcoverage
ilioischial line: coxa profunda, protrusio acetabuli
crossover sign, ischial spine sign: acetabular retroversion
posterior wall sign: prominent posterior wall or acetabular retroversion
pistol grip deformity: cam morphology
In addition, several lateral hip projections including Dunn 45° and 90° views, Meyer lateral, frog-leg lateral, Lequesne's false profile, cross-table lateral have been described to assess the hip in a second plane, with the following signs 7,10:
anterior center-edge angle (on false profile view): to confirm acetabular overcoverage
femoral head-neck offset: cam morphology
Osseous morphological abnormalities of the acetabulum and femoral head-neck junction that is possible pincer and/or cam morphology can be easily and fast assessed in multiple planes including radial (double oblique) reconstructions along the femoral neck 2,3. In addition, 3D reconstructions enable surgical planning e.g. for osteochondroplasty 5,11.
Typical findings on CT are an osseous bump in the anterosuperior position of the femoral head-neck junction with cysts and herniation pit as indirect signs for cam morphology. Increased acetabular depth, acetabular ossicle and acetabular retroversion indicate pincer morphology 4,10.
Findings can be objectified with the following measurements:
alpha angle: >55° in anterior and >60° in anterosuperior position indicate cam morphology
femoral head-neck offset: <6-7 mm in anterosuperior position indicates cam morphology
acetabular retroversion: (normal 12-20°) as an indicator for pincer morphology
Similar to CT MRI allows the assessment of cam and/or pincer morphology. A 3D sequence of the hip in question can be considered, for easy and fast radial (double oblique) reformations along the femoral neck and proper evaluation of the acetabulum.
In addition to morphological assessments of the femoral head-neck junction and the acetabulum and measurements as acetabular retroversion, alpha angle and femoral head-neck offset MRI allows for assessment of concomitant labral and chondral injuries like chondrolabral separation or carpet lesion and/or features indicative of the latter e.g. paralabral cysts 1-5,12,13.
Direct MR arthrography can improve the detection of chondral injuries as carpet lesions and can add sensitivity for the detection of labral injury e.g. tears or chondrolabral separation 1,3,12,14-16. Both 3D gradient-echo and spin-echo sequences have been described with good diagnostic accuracy 16. It seems that CT arthrography is most accurate in detecting labral tears 17.
A report for preoperative evaluation should include the following 2,3:
description of abnormalities in the femoral head-neck junction: e.g. bump, cysts, herniation pit
description of acetabular morphology: e.g. coxa profunda, acetabular retroversion
associated findings e.g. bone marrow edema
labral detachment and other labral pathology
chondral lesions e.g. carpet lesion, chondral wear and/or defects
measurements: e.g. alpha angle, femoral head-neck offset, acetabular index, acetabular depth
signs of early osteoarthritis: subchondral sclerosis, cysts, osteophytes
associated soft tissue injuries: musculotendinous injury
Treatment and prognosis
Untreated femoroacetabular impingement can lead to damage to the labrum and acetabular cartilage, manifesting as hip and groin pain if left untreated and will later progress to early osteoarthritis of the hip.
Therapeutic management includes conservative treatment, rehabilitation and/or surgery depending on the extent of clinical signs and symptoms as well as the underlying morphology and overall patient condition. Conservative measures include activity and/or lifestyle modifications, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, watchful waiting, whereas rehabilitation is targeted on alleviating symptoms by improving neuromuscular control and movement patterns as well as stability of the hip 2. Surgical options aim at restoring hip morphology and repair or reconstruction of chondral and labral damage with arthroscopic and open surgical approaches, the latter including femoral or acetabular osteotomy or osteochondroplasty 2-4,18,19. The indication for surgery warrants not only morphological changes but also typical clinical signs and symptoms indicative of femoroacetabular impingement 2.
History and etymology
It was thought to have been first described by the Swiss orthopedic surgeon Reinhold Ganz in 2003 23.
other forms of hip impingement
- 1. Ganz R, Leunig M, Leunig-Ganz K, Harris W. The Etiology of Osteoarthritis of the Hip: An Integrated Mechanical Concept. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(2):264-72. doi:10.1007/s11999-007-0060-z - Pubmed
- 2. Griffin D, Dickenson E, O'Donnell J et al. The Warwick Agreement on Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome (FAI Syndrome): An International Consensus Statement. Br J Sports Med. 2016;50(19):1169-76. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-096743 - Pubmed
- 3. Li A, Jawetz S, Greditzer H, Burge A, Nawabi D, Potter H. MRI for the Preoperative Evaluation of Femoroacetabular Impingement. Insights Imaging. 2016;7(2):187-98. doi:10.1007/s13244-015-0459-0 - Pubmed
- 4. Sankar W, Nevitt M, Parvizi J, Felson D, Agricola R, Leunig M. Femoroacetabular Impingement: Defining the Condition and Its Role in the Pathophysiology of Osteoarthritis. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2013;21(suppl):S7-S15. doi:10.5435/jaaos-21-07-s7
- 5. Palmer W, Bancroft L, Bonar F et al. Glossary of Terms for Musculoskeletal Radiology. Skeletal Radiol. 2020;49(Suppl 1):1-33. doi:10.1007/s00256-020-03465-1 - Pubmed
- 6. Tannast M, Siebenrock K, Anderson S. Femoroacetabular Impingement: Radiographic Diagnosis--What the Radiologist Should Know. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(6):1540-52. doi:10.2214/AJR.06.0921 - Pubmed
- 7. Clohisy J, Carlisle J, Beaulé P et al. A Systematic Approach to the Plain Radiographic Evaluation of the Young Adult Hip. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2008;90(Supplement_4):47-66. doi:10.2106/jbjs.h.00756
- 8. Kakaty D, Fischer A, Hosalkar H, Siebenrock K, Tannast M. The Ischial Spine Sign: Does Pelvic Tilt and Rotation Matter? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(3):769-74. doi:10.1007/s11999-009-1021-5 - Pubmed
- 9. Werner C, Copeland C, Ruckstuhl T et al. Radiographic Markers of Acetabular Retroversion: Correlation of the Cross-Over Sign, Ischial Spine Sign and Posterior Wall Sign. Acta Orthop Belg. 2010;76(2):166-73. - Pubmed
- 10. Atkins P, Shin Y, Agrawal P et al. Which Two-Dimensional Radiographic Measurements of Cam Femoroacetabular Impingement Best Describe the Three-Dimensional Shape of the Proximal Femur? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019;477(1):242-53. doi:10.1097/CORR.0000000000000462 - Pubmed
- 11. Wells J, Nepple J, Crook K et al. Femoral Morphology in the Dysplastic Hip: Three-Dimensional Characterizations With CT. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(4):1045-54. doi:10.1007/s11999-016-5119-2 - Pubmed
- 12. Agten C, Sutter R, Buck F, Pfirrmann C. Hip Imaging in Athletes: Sports Imaging Series. Radiology. 2016;280(2):351-69. doi:10.1148/radiol.2016151348 - Pubmed
- 13. Robinson P. Conventional 3-T MRI and 1.5-T MR Arthrography of Femoroacetabular Impingement. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199(3):509-15. doi:10.2214/AJR.12.8672 - Pubmed
- 14. Sutter R, Zubler V, Hoffmann A et al. Hip MRI: How Useful is Intraarticular Contrast Material for Evaluating Surgically Proven Lesions of the Labrum and Articular Cartilage? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(1):160-9. doi:10.2214/AJR.12.10266 - Pubmed
- 15. Aubry S, Bélanger D, Giguère C, Lavigne M. Magnetic Resonance Arthrography of the Hip: Technique and Spectrum of Findings in Younger Patients. Insights Imaging. 2010;1(2):72-82. doi:10.1007/s13244-010-0023-x - Pubmed
- 16. Nishii T, Tanaka H, Nakanishi K, Sugano N, Miki H, Yoshikawa H. Fat-Suppressed 3D Spoiled Gradient-Echo MRI and MDCT Arthrography of Articular Cartilage in Patients with Hip Dysplasia. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185(2):379-85. doi:10.2214/ajr.185.2.01850379 - Pubmed
- 17. Reiman M, Thorborg K, Goode A, Cook C, Weir A, Hölmich P. Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Modalities and Injection Techniques for the Diagnosis of Femoroacetabular Impingement/Labral Tear: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(11):2665-77. doi:10.1177/0363546516686960 - Pubmed
- 18. Chambers C & Zhang A. Outcomes for Surgical Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adults. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2019;12(3):271-80. doi:10.1007/s12178-019-09567-1 - Pubmed
- 19. Larson C & Stone R. Current Concepts and Trends for Operative Treatment of FAI: Hip Arthroscopy. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2013;6(3):242-9. doi:10.1007/s12178-013-9170-2 - Pubmed
- 20. Clohisy J, Carlisle J, Trousdale R et al. Radiographic Evaluation of the Hip Has Limited Reliability. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 2009;467(3):666-75. doi:10.1007/s11999-008-0626-4 - Pubmed
- 21. Pfirrmann C, Duc S, Zanetti M, Dora C, Hodler J. MR Arthrography of Acetabular Cartilage Delamination in Femoroacetabular Cam Impingement1. Radiology. 2008;249(1):236-41. doi:10.1148/radiol.2491080093 - Pubmed
- 22. Magee T. Comparison of 3.0-T MRvs3.0-T MR Arthrography of the Hip for Detection of Acetabular Labral Tears and Chondral Defects in the Same Patient Population. BJR. 2015;88(1053):20140817. doi:10.1259/bjr.20140817 - Pubmed
- 23. Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M, Leunig M, Nötzli H, Siebenrock K. Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Cause for Osteoarthritis of the Hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;(417):112-20. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000096804.78689.c2 - Pubmed
- 24. Palmer W. Femoroacetabular Impingement (FAI): Counterpoint—Do Not Equate FAI Morphology With FAI Syndrome. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021;217(6):1297-8. doi:10.2214/ajr.21.26181