Hip-spine syndrome leads to failed hip replacement and lumbar spinal fusion
Ross Hauser, MD; Danielle R. Steilen-Matias, MMS, PA-C Hip-spine syndrome leads to failed hip replacement and lumbar spinal fusion.
It is challenging enough to think about getting a major surgery such as a spinal fusion or a hip replacement. It is even more challenging to think that after you had this one surgery, you now need the other.
I had lower back pain, I was diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis. I had fusion surgery. After the surgery, I had the same pain
This is an example email we receive. “I had lower back pain, I was diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis. I had fusion surgery. After the surgery, I had the same pain. Now my doctors think it was my hip all along.” This is another: “I had a hip replacement because my MRI showed osteoarthritis and I was in a lot of pain. After the surgery, I still had the same pain. Now my doctors think it was my back all along. Now I should get the spinal fusion.”
Some of you may be thinking that this is far-fetched, how can this be? If you are among those thinking this, you are then not among the people who had a hip replacement because of back pain and a spinal fusion because of hip pain You are not among the people who neither they nor their doctors realized they were getting surgery for the wrong thing. Below we will present the research and clinical findings. Some people do very well with getting both these surgeries. These are not the people who are reaching out to us. We see the people with the problems we described above, and those we will describe below, and those who would rather not go through these major surgeries.
First, Danielle R. Steilen-Matias, MMS, PA-C explains the common problems we see in our patients.
Learning points summary:
- Hip-spine syndrome is a pain syndrome characterized by injuries in both the hip and the low back that impact each other.
- At 0:27 of the video, the interactions of the hip and the spine is demonstrated with a model of the pelvis.
- Hip-spine syndrome commonly involves your hip and your sacroiliac joint or even your low back part of your spine. When you develop injuries or degenerative wear and tear in both the hips and the low back, these injuries impact each other. The back pain can make the hip pain worse, the hip pain can make the back pain worse as degenerative disease is accelerating in both areas.
- Many times we will see a patient in the office. They will have a very specific diagnosis that their problems all come from the hip, or they will have a very specific diagnosis that their problems are all coming from the lower back. After we do a physical examination and talk to the patient about their medical history, it is clear that this patient has issues in both the hip and spine.
- Often we find that patients have completed a conservative care treatment course for their lower back or they have completed a conservative care treatment course for their hip, yet they still have pain. In this situation, conservative care may have been directed at the wrong pain triggers.
- In patients like this, we treat the hip, spine, sacroiliac joint, sacrum areas with Prolotherapy to bring stability into the area by restoring normal function to damaged or weakened spinal and hip ligaments. (The treatment is explained below in greater detail).
- At Caring Medical we have a very high success rate treating patients effectively and alleviating their chronic pain with Prolotherapy.
In this next section, we will explore research leading up to clinical observations in helping patients with hip and low back pain problems.
Hip-Spine Syndrome is born after doctors notice patients still have pain after hip replacement and spinal fusion
Above we described people with hip pain after spinal fusion and back pain after hip replacement because surgery addressed the wrong issue. Lets let the surgeons take over from here.
Research from the Vanderbilt Orthopaedic Institute published in The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (1) warns doctors about wrong surgeries.
“The incidence of symptomatic osteoarthritis of the hip and degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis is increasing in our aging population. Because the subjective complaints can be similar, it is often difficult to differentiate intra- and extra-articular hip pathology (intra meaning the pain is in the hip joint at the ball and socket location, extra means the supporting ligaments and tendons that lead to hip instability) from degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.
These conditions can present concurrently, which makes it challenging to determine the predominant underlying pain generator. . . Determining the potential benefit from surgical intervention and the order in which to address these conditions are of utmost importance for patient satisfaction and adequate relief of symptoms.”
The confusion of hip-spine is significant and can lead to poor surgical choices
Doctors at the University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center wrote in the September 2017 edition of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, surgery and research:(2)
- Researchers have recently proposed the concept of “hip-spine syndrome”, however, there exists limited evidence available to differentiate whether these accompanying or associated hip and spine pain and inflammation are due to anatomic/structural causes, or systemic/metabolic effects.
- Comment: In other words, the confusion of hip-spine is significant and can lead to poor surgical choices. Not only is hip-spine syndrome a diagnosis for suggesting that the patient’s pain needs to be thought of as possibly coming from the hip, from the spine, and from both, but in addition to, a problem of factors that may include systemic/metabolic factors, such as inflammation from obesity or autoimmune problems and disease. PLEASE NOTE: Again we are being issued warnings of the possibility of continued pain after a complicated surgery was possibly performed on the wrong area.
Here are more factors the doctors discussed:
- Age was the strongest predictor of arthritis at each site (back and hip).
- Anatomic/structural influences about the lumbosacral-pelvic junction contribute towards the development of arthritis (Concurrent structural damage) that is separate from any systemic/metabolic effects.
- Surgeons performing total hip replacement should remain aware of the relationship between low back pain and hip arthritis, although future research is necessary regarding the optimal surgical treatment of these patients.
Of course, we believe that future research is necessary regarding optimal NON-surgical treatment of these patients.
Patients with Hip-Spine Syndrome made worse by Hip Replacement and Spinal Fusion
University and hospital researchers in Sweden made the connection between poor hip replacement outcomes and previous lumbar fusion surgery.
Writing in the Joint and Bone Journal, (3) they examined patients who first had the lumbar surgery, then proceeded later to a total hip replacement. Their research conclusions are presented here:
- “Lumbar spinal surgery prior to total hip replacement is associated with:
- less reduction of pain,
- worse health-related quality of life,
- and less satisfaction one year after total hip replacement
- This is useful information to share in the decision-making process and may help establish realistic expectations of the outcomes of total hip replacement in patients who also have previously undergone lumbar spinal surgery.
The limited research available suggests spinal pathology predicts and warns of less pain relief and worse outcomes after total hip replacement
These same unfortunate results had been previously reported earlier in 2017 by doctors at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco in The Journal of arthroplasty:(4)
- The coexistence of degenerative hip disease and spinal pathology is not uncommon for the number of surgical treatments performed for each condition increasing annually.
- The limited research available suggests spinal pathology predicts and warns of less pain relief and worse outcomes after total hip replacement.
The UCSF researchers concluded their study with:
- Patients with preexisting lumbar spinal fusion experience worse early outcomes after primary total hip replacement including higher rates of complications and reoperation.
- The complex interplay between the lumbar spine and hip warrants attention and further investigation.
Understanding reduced range of hip motion causing more lower back pain
Doctors from Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine wrote in The Journal of Orthopaedic and sports physical therapy (5) of patients with hip-spine syndrome with known hip arthritis and reduced range of hip motion.
- They found on examination, 101 patients with hip arthritis (68 women, 33 men) with an average age of 47.6 years:
- 81 (80%) had reduced hip flexion;
- 76 (75%) had reduced hip internal rotation
The researchers concluded: Physical examination findings indicating hip dysfunction are common in patients presenting with low back pain. Patients with low back pain and positive hip examination findings have more pain and worse function compared to patients with low back pain but without positive hip examination findings.
Ischiofemoral impingement causing lumbar pathology
In a January 2017 paper entitled: The Hip-Spine Effect: A Biomechanical Study of Ischiofemoral Impingement Effect on Lumbar Facet Joints, Doctors at Baylor University and the University of Texas (6) found a relation between ischiofemoral impingement and lumbar facet joint load during hip extension.
They suggested that limited terminal hip extension due to simulated ischiofemoral impingement significantly increases L3-4 and L4-5 lumbar facet joint load when compared with non-ischiofemoral impingement hips.
This study directly links ischiofemoral impingement to increased lumbar facet loads and supports the clinical findings of ischiofemoral impingement causing lumbar pathology. Assessing and treating hip disorders that limit extension could have benefits in patients with concomitant lower back symptoms.
How could my Hip MRI be so wrong?
So again, you went and had an MRI of your hip. Your MRI came back and showed a lot of degenerative problems. You may have been told you have “bone on bone,” nothing can be done for this short of hip replacement. You went in for a hip surgery. After months of rehabilitation, you still have the same hip pain. Upon further review and another MRI, it is determined that your pain is actually coming from your SI joint and/or your lower back. You may be finding yourself on this page because you are now researching alternatives to SI joint and low back surgery.
Something we hear, perhaps more often than one would think is, “how was my hip MRI so wrong?”
A Review of Research on the Value of Hip Scans
A person with long-term hip pain management will typically tell us about all the tests, images, scans, CDs, and other digital images they have of their problem hip. They then will ask how can they get these films to us. These patients are very anxious to avoid either a hip arthroscopic surgery or a hip replacement surgery. They sometimes think that the quicker we can review their images, the quicker they can avoid the surgery.
We tell many of these people, “come in for an examination. Let us look at how you walk and what type of range of motion you have in your hip. Then if we need to confirm or dismiss something in your hip, we will take a look at your films.” In our thinking, the quicker we can do a physical examination, the quicker we can assess whether or not we can help them avoid a hip surgery.
For some people, telling them that we do not want to see all these imaging studies first, is hard to understand.
For these people, his or her entire problematic hip medical history has been guided by imaging. Some people are so confused by this that they mistake what we are telling them into asking, “Do I need to get a new MRI?” The answer is almost always NO. In our experience, people who have already had a hip replacement on one side, even a successful one, and do not want to “go through all that again,” understand the limitations of film best.
Pictures of the hip, are they worth it?
What are the types of imaging a person can be ordered when they have chronic pain? Are these tests accurate in helping him or her in treatment? Are these tests accurate?
A look at the imaging studies
Usually, a person with chronic hip pain will come into our office and they will have one, two, three or all four of the following performed over a period of time.
- Hip X-ray
- Hip CT (computed tomography)
- Hip MRI (Magnetic resonance imaging), and
- Hip Ultrasound
What’s the difference between these imaging techniques?
Perhaps the question is not what is the difference in the techniques, but rather what is the difference in how helpful these images can be.
The x-ray shows:
For the most part, the initial imaging examination will be an X-ray. An X-ray will be most effective in showing degenerative bony abnormalities and loss of joint space, signifying cartilage loss. In degenerative hip disease, it is usually the X-ray that convinces someone with hip pain that they have advancing hip osteoarthritis, bone death or avascular necrosis, bone spurs, and loss of cartilage.
The CT scan shows:
CT or CAT scans are looking for soft tissue damage that the x-rays do not see. This would be muscle, ligaments, and tendon. Because of the complexity of the hip, this imaging test is usually not favored for hip pain patients as images are poorly defined.
The MRI shows:
For some people, the end-all of all end-alls is the MRI image. It is extraordinarily difficult for people to believe that their MRI is not telling the correct story of their hip pain. The research questioning MRI accuracy will be shown below.
An MRI is looking for things the X-ray and the CT scan cannot show. This would be soft tissue damage, fluid buildup or hidden swelling. The MRI may also reveal bone deformities that the X-ray did not show.
- When you are offered a hip MRI, you may hear terms such as Direct or Indirect Hip MRI Arthrography. The terms signify a difference in the use of contrast material to make the image more clear. Indirect is where contrast material is injected into the bloodstream and circulates through the body, or Direct, where contrast material is injected directly into the hip.
Ultrasound allows visualization of pathology during motion. In our clinics, we use this tool on selected patients to see directly and immediately into the joint. We can then treat the visualized musculoskeletal condition with Prolotherapy. We also will use this tool in patients seeking treatment for pain following joint replacement.
It is hard to figure out what is causing the patient’s hip pain. It can be any one of a number of things, the MRI seems to be the tool most doctors like to use, but is it any good?
July 2017: Doctors at Queen Elizabeth Hospital in the United Kingdom and the University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands wrote in the European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology: (7)
“The assessment of a patient with chronic hip pain can be challenging. The differential diagnosis of intra-articular pathology causing hip pain can be diverse. These include conditions such as osteoarthritis, fracture, and avascular necrosis, synovitis, loose bodies, labral tears, articular pathology and, femoro-acetabular impingement. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) arthrography of the hip has been widely used now for diagnosis of articular pathology of the hip.”
In simpler terms, it is hard to figure out what is causing the patient’s hip pain. It can be any one of a number of things, the MRI seems to be the tool most doctors like to use, but is it any good?
Here are the research findings:
- A retrospective analysis (looking back on) 113 patients who had MRI arthrogram and who underwent hip arthroscopy was included in the study.
- The MRI arthrogram findings were compared to those found on arthroscopy.
What is happening here is that these patients got an MRI. They went to arthroscopic surgery. The arthroscopic surgery is considered the gold standard of determining what is going on in your hip because there is a camera inside your hip taking pictures. When the MRI is doubted this is the “look-and-see hip surgery,” you may be told to get. In this study, what was seen from the “outside” the MRI was compared to what was seen on the inside “the arthroscopic surgery.”
We are going to talk about two terms sensitivity and specificity in MRI readings. You may have heard your doctor discuss them and may not have been sure what he/she was really talking about. So let’s explain what these terms mean. It may give you a much deeper understanding of the accuracy of what your hip MRI report says:
Hip Labral tears
- In this research, the doctors found Labral tear-sensitivity 84% and specificity 64% against the arthroscopic findings.
Let’s say you went and had an MRI for a hip labral tear. The radiologist tells you, based on this research, that the test has a sensitivity of 84% and specificity 64%. What does this mean?
- The MRI will identify something (sensitivity) as a labral tear 84% of the time. But it is really only a labral tear (specificity) 64% of the time, overall accuracy 80%.
You may have hip delamination. This is where the cartilage separates from the bone.
- Researchers found delamination on MRI 7% on the time but were pretty positive it was delamination (specificity 98%) when they did find it. The overall accuracy of MRI for delamination accuracy 39%.
AN MRI to determine articular cartilage defects
The articular cartilage is the cartilage that wraps the bones of the ball and socket of the hip. Chondral changes is a term to describe damage to this cartilage. The study results on the accuracy of this MRI test is going to be somewhat surprising.
- Chondral changes-sensitivity 25%, specificity 83%, accuracy 58%.
This is one of the determinates of “bone on bone,” the probable single most diagnosis that sends more people to hip replacement than any other. Accuracy 58%. Let that sink in.
AN MRI to Femoro-acetabular impingement (CAM deformity)
Femoroacetabular Impingement (FAI) or sometimes diagnosed simply as Hip Impingement is a condition where abnormal contact and rubbing of the ball and socket portion of the hip bones create joint-damaging friction. This “bone-on-bone” situation subsequently develops into degenerative osteoarthritis in addition to causing injuries to the labral area. Please see my article for more on this subject Femoroacetabular Impingement and Prolotherapy
- The MRI diagnosed Femoro-acetabular impingement (CAM deformity)-sensitivity 34% of the time. When it was diagnosed, it was diagnosed correctly 83% of the time. Overall accuracy 66%.
It is interesting to note bone on bone diagnosis accuracy of 58% – 66%
We see many patients, who after our examination are told that our treatments can help them say to us, “But I have bone on bone, my only option is a hip replacement.” Remember what we said above. For some people, the end-all of end-alls is the MRI image. It is extraordinarily difficult for people to believe that their MRI is not telling the correct story of their hip pain.
The conclusion of this study from the research team?
“Our study conclusions are MRI arthrogram is a useful investigation tool in detecting labral tears, it is also helpful in the diagnosis of femoro-acetabular impingement. However, when it comes to the diagnosis of chondral changes, defects and cartilage delamination, the sensitivity and accuracy are low.”
Not the only study
This was not the only study to document the problems of hip MRI. In May 2018, doctors in Australia published these findings in the Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. (8)
“Conventional non-arthrographic (no contrast dye) MRI offers an accurate non-invasive (non-surgical) method to screen patients with symptoms referable to the hip by revealing the presence of labral tears, chondral defects, and ligamentum teres tears/synovitis. This study demonstrates that tears and synovitis of the ligamentum teres as potential sources of hip pain can be accurately identified on conventional non-arthrographic MRI. However, MRI has poor specificity and negative predictive value, and thus, a negative MRI result may warrant further investigation.”
What does this mean?
It means that when the MRI looks at your hip it is pretty confident when the labral tears, chondral defects, and ligamentum teres tears/synovitis (the big ligament of the hip) are obvious. BUT, when this damage is not so obvious and the person has hip pain, we should listen to the patient and not rely on the MRI to contradict them. “A negative MRI result may warrant further investigation.” In our office, this further investigation is a physical examination.
So how could my hip MRI be so wrong? Here is a March 2019 study
In a March 2019, in the surgeon’s journal Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery, (9) surgeons and radiologists at the Chung-Ang University College of Medicine in Seoul, Korea shared these findings with the international medical community.
We are going to go back to talking about sensitivity (the test’s ability to identify something that may be causing your pain) and specificity (the MRIs ability to determine that what it thinks is causing your pain is in fact actually causing your pain).
In this research, the doctors and radiologists investigated sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography arthrography (CTA), on the basis of arthroscopic findings, to diagnose acetabular labral tears and chondral lesions.
- They reviewed the results of MRI and subsequent CTA in 36 hips that underwent arthroscopic surgery (33 patients; 17 males [17 hips] and 16 females [19 hips]; average age, 35 years)
- All patients had positive impingement test results and groin pain.
The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of computed tomography arthrography for detection of acetabular labral tears by two observers were 60%, 80%, and 64%, respectively, and 65%, 70%, and 69%, respectively.
- In other words 64% or the time or 69% of the time, the computed tomography arthrography and its interpretation correctly identified acetabular labral tears. How was this verified? By observation during arthroscopic surgery.
- So it is possible that 31-36% of people had an arthroscopic surgery to DISPROVE what the computed tomography arthrography suggested.
If you think that is bad. Here is the comparison to MRIs
- The MRI offered little help to the radiologists in determining accuracy of reading in acetabular labral tears. The MRI could only think it found the problem according to one observer, 36% of the time and 46% of the time to the other observer.
What could the researchers conclude other than:
- “This study demonstrated that the accuracy of MRI to detect an acetabular labral tear and a chondral lesion of the hip joint was not sufficient. CTA was reliable in the diagnosis of acetabular labral tears. However, both CTA and MRI were also of limited value to detect chondral lesions.”
Injections may help identify the pain source in hip-spine syndrome
In a March 2020 study published in the surgical journal Orthopedics (10), doctors looked at the overlapping symptoms between hip and lumbar spine pathologies and the complication of diagnoses and treatments this problem causes. They suggest that diagnostic injections may help and write: “in hip-spine syndrome when a pain source cannot be elucidated, an ultrasound- or fluoroscopic-guided intra-articular hip injection may be a powerful and reliable diagnostic tool.”
Injections may present a successful non-surgical treatment option for hip-spine syndrome
We are going to demonstrate Prolotherapy treatments for various disorders around the hip-spine and pelvic complexes. The most important point is that we can treat all these areas in the same visit, we can address the hip and spine together.
Prolotherapy: Treating the ligaments in sacroiliac joint dysfunction
The Spinal ligament repair injection treatment option Prolotherapy
In this video, Danielle R. Steilen-Matias, MMS, PA-C ., explains and demonstrates a Prolotherapy treatment into the lumbar spine.
Video Summary and Learning Points
- Prolotherapy is multiple injections of simple dextrose into the damaged spinal area.
- Each injection goes down to the bone, where the ligaments meet the bone at the fibro-osseous junction. It is at this junction we want to stimulate repair of the ligament attachment to the bone.
- We treat the whole low back area to include the sacroiliac or SI joint. In this video, the patient’s sacroiliac area in being treated to make sure that we get the ligament insertions and attachments of the SI joint in the low back.
- I’ve marked with a black crayon all down the midline of this patient’s back and then I have a horizontal line drawn where her pain stops. This patient has a curvature of her spine, scoliosis, so it is important to understand where the midpoint (center) of her spine is. In this patient, we are going to go up to the horizontal line into the thoracic area which is usually not typical of all treatments.
- It’s important to note that this particular patient is actually not sedated in any way so even though it is a lot of shots and a lot of injections through the skin which can be painful, patients tend to tolerate it really well the whole procedure goes relatively quickly
- At 2:20 I’m just making sure that I get the sacroiliac or SI ligaments as well as the iliolumbar ligament to help strengthen the low back.
- After treatment we want the patient to take it easy for about 4 days.
- Depending on the severity of the low back pain condition, we may need to offer 3 to 10 treatments every 4 to 6 weeks.
This is a hip procedure on a runner who has hip instability and a lot of clicking and popping in the front of the hip.
In this video Prolotherapy treatments are demonstrated by Ross Hauser, MD:
- This is a hip procedure on a runner who has hip instability and a lot of clicking and popping in the front of the hip.
- This patient has a suspected labral tear and ligament injury.
- The injections are treating the anterior part of the hip which includes the hip labrum and the Greater Trochanter area, the interior portion, the gluteus minimus is treated.
- The Greater Trochanter area is where various attachments of the ligaments and muscle tendons converge, including the gluteus medius.
- From the front of the hip (1:05) we can treat the pubofemoral ligament and the iliofemoral ligaments.
- From the posterior approach, I’m going to inject some proliferant within the hip joint itself, and then, of course, we’re going to do all the attachments in the posterior part of the hip and that will include the ischiofemoral ligament, the iliofemoral ligaments. We can also treat the attachments of the smaller muscles too including the Obturator, the Piriformis attachments onto the Greater Trochanter
- Hip problems are ubiquitous, the hip ligament injury or hip instability is a cause of degenerative hip disease and it’s the reason why people have to get to get hip replacements.
For more specific diagnosis of your hip – spine problems please refer to these papers on our site:
- Platelet Rich Plasma therapy for treating Hip Osteoarthritis
- Greater trochanteric pain syndrome and bursitis treatment
- Comparing Gluteus Medius Tendinopathy Injections and Surgery
- Does hip preserving arthroscopic surgery lead to hip replacement anyway? The evidence.
- When painful hip MRI shows nothing
- Why physical therapy and exercise does not help your hip pain and what can help
- Sciatica and lumbar radiculopathy Prolotherapy treatments
- Treatment options for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
- Non-surgical treatment options for lumbar spinal stenosis
- Pelvic Floor Disorders, Pelvic Girdle Pain, and Symphysis Pubis Dysfunction following childbirth
- Failed Back Surgery Syndrome treatment options – the new research
- Why physical therapy and yoga did not help your low back pain
If you have questions about hip spine complex problems, get help and information from our Caring Medical staff
1 Devin CJ, McCullough KA, Morris BJ, Yates AJ, Kang JD. Hip‐spine syndrome. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2012 Jul 1;20(7):434-42. [Google Scholar]
2 Weinberg DS, Gebhart JJ, Liu RW. Hip-Spine Syndrome: a cadaveric analysis between osteoarthritis of the lumbar spine and hip joints. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research. 2017 May 31. [Google Scholar]
3 Eneqvist T, Nemes S, Brisby H, Fritzell P, Garellick G, Rolfson O. Lumbar surgery prior to total hip arthroplasty is associated with worse patient-reported outcomes. Bone Joint J. 2017 Jun 1;99(6):759-65. [Google Scholar]
4 Barry JJ, Sing DC, Vail TP, Hansen EN. Early Outcomes of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty After Prior Lumbar Spinal Fusion. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Feb;32(2):470-474. [Google Scholar]
5 Prather H, Cheng A, Steger-May K, Maheshwari V, Van Dillen L. Hip and Lumbar Spine Physical Examination Findings in People Presenting With Low Back Pain, With or Without Lower Extremity Pain. journal of orthopaedic & sports physical therapy. 2017 Mar;47(3):163-72. [Google Scholar]
6 Gómez-Hoyos J, Khoury A, Schröder R, Johnson E, Palmer IJ, Martin HD. The Hip-Spine Effect: A Biomechanical Study of Ischiofemoral Impingement Effect on Lumbar Facet Joints. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2017 Jan 31;33(1):101-7. [Google Scholar]
7 Rajeev A, Tuinebreijer W, Mohamed A, Newby M. The validity and accuracy of MRI arthrogram in the assessment of painful articular disorders of the hip. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology. 2017:1-7. [Google Scholar]
8 Annabell L, Master V, Rhodes A, Moreira B, Coetzee C, Tran P. Hip pathology: the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13(1):127. Published 2018 May 29. doi:10.1186/s13018-018-0832-z [Google Scholar]
9 Lee GY, Kim S, Baek SH, Jang EC, Ha YC. Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Computed Tomography Arthrography in Diagnosing Acetabular Labral Tears and Chondral Lesions. Clinics in orthopedic surgery. 2019 Mar 1;11(1):21-7. [Google Scholar]
10 Maldonado DR, Mu BH, Ornelas J, Chen SL, Lall AC, Walker-Santiago R, Rosinsky PJ, Shapira J, Domb BG. Hip-Spine Syndrome: The Diagnostic Utility of Guided Intra-articular Hip Injections. Orthopedics. 2019 Dec 31. [Google Scholar]