PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 4, 2026Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research2 citations

Which Imaging Modalities, Parameters, and Diagnostic Thresholds Best Define Hip Instability? Consensus Statements From a Scoping Review and an International Multidisciplinary Delphi Study

View Full Paper
VLVincent J. LeopoldUniversity of OttawaKRKawan RakhraOttawa HospitalASAndrea M. SpikerUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison

Key Points

  • This research aims to identify the most effective imaging modalities and diagnostic thresholds for hip instability assessment.
  • Conducted a modified Delphi consensus study with an international expert panel.
  • Developed 27 statements on imaging modalities, parameters, and thresholds after a scoping review.
  • Achieved consensus defined as 75% agreement from voting on the statements.
  • 81% agreement reached for 22 out of 27 statements on imaging standards.
  • Radiography, MRI, and CT identified as foundational for assessing hip instability.
  • Consensus on specific quantitative thresholds, such as LCEA < 20° for diagnosing hip dysplasia.

Abstract

Background The diagnosis of hip instability remains challenging because of its multifactorial etiology and the variability of imaging practices across institutions. Hip instability refers to a clinical condition of insufficient osseous and/or soft tissue constraint with abnormal femoral head motion and symptoms, which may occur along a morphologic spectrum that overlaps with—but is not synonymous with—developmental dysplasia of the hip. Although numerous imaging modalities and imaging parameters have been proposed, there is limited consensus on which are most relevant, how they should be measured, and what diagnostic thresholds best correlate with instability. To address this gap, a Delphi consensus study with an international panel of experts to establish standardized clinical statements for the diagnostic criteria of hip instability was conducted. Questions/purposes (1) What are the imaging modalities and protocols for investigating hip instability? (2) Which imaging parameters are most strongly associated with clinical hip instability? (3) What are the quantitative imaging thresholds for diagnosing hip instability? Methods A consensus study using a modified Delphi technique was conducted in accordance with the Accurate Consensus Reporting Document (ACCORD) guideline. Following a scoping review, 27 statements addressing imaging modalities and protocols (question 1), imaging parameters associated with hip instability (question 2), and quantitative imaging thresholds (question 3) were developed. These statements were evaluated by a multidisciplinary international expert panel during a structured consensus meeting, with two rounds of anonymous voting and consensus defined a priori as ≥ 75% agreement. Consensus was achieved for 81% (22 of 27) of statements. Results There was strong agreement that radiography (AP pelvis, false-profile, Dunn view) and MRI and CT constitute the foundational imaging modalities for the assessment of hip instability, whereas cartilage mapping techniques and dynamic ultrasound were considered adjunctive modalities with a more limited and evolving role. Radiographic measurements such as lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), anterior wall index (AWI), posterior wall index, and Tönnis angle reached consensus as key morphologic indicators. Several quantitative thresholds were endorsed. An LCEA of 30°. In contrast, no consensus was reached for less-established imaging metrics such as the FEAR index, crescent sign, anterior capsule thickness, and dynamic femoral head translation. Conclusion This international Delphi consensus defined core imaging approaches and threshold values for the evaluation of hip instability. Although agreement was reached on key morphometric parameters and diagnostic thresholds, a lack of consensus exists around newer soft tissue and dynamic measures, highlighting important areas for future research. Clinical Relevance In patients with suspected clinical hip instability, standard radiography should be used as the first-line imaging modality, followed by targeted use of CT and MRI to evaluate three-dimensional bony morphology and soft tissue stabilizers. Imaging findings should be interpreted within a stepwise, algorithmic framework that integrates clinical assessment with multiple complementary imaging parameters rather than relying on isolated measurements. Ultimately, accurate diagnosis of hip instability depends on the integration of findings from multiple modalities. Additionally, it must be recognized that hip instability may exist even in the absence of characteristic radiologic signs.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Leopold et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d0aee0659487ece0fa4ccehttps://doi.org/10.1097/corr.0000000000003905
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper