Pelvic Tilt Evaluation From Frontal Radiographs: The Validity, Interobserver Reliability and Intraobserver Reproducibility of the Sacro-Femoral-Pubic Parameter

Evaluating pelvic tilt using the pelvic antero-posterior radiographs: A novel method

Pelvic tilt (PT) is an important parameter for orthopedic surgeries involving hip and spine, typically determined from sagittal pelvic radiographs. However, various challenges can compromise the feasibility of measurement from sagittal imaging, including obscured landmarks, anatomical variations, hardware interference, and limited medical resources. Addressing these challenges and with the aim of reducing radiation exposure to patients, our study developed a novel method to estimate PT from antero-posterior (AP) radiographs, using vertical distances from the pelvic outlet and obturator foramen. We correlated these measurements with PT, defined both anatomically (anterior pelvic plane, PTa) and mechanically (centers of femoral heads and sacral plate, PTm). The study explored creating linear, exponential, and multivariate regression models based on twelve 3D CT-derived pelvic models (six men, six women), simulating AP radiograph projections with controlled PTs. We then validated these models against 105 pairs of patient stereoradiographs. Statistical analysis revealed that combined exponential-linear models yielded the most accurate results, with Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.75 for PTa and 0.77 for PTm, and mean absolute errors of 3.7° ± 2.6° for PTa and 4.5° ± 3.4° for PTm, showing excellent measurement reliability (all ICCs > 0.9) without significant gender discrepancies. In conclusion, this study presents a validated, simple, and accessible method for estimating PT using AP radiograph parameters, supported by the Supporting Information S1: Excel Tool, showing great potential for clinical application in hip and spine procedures.

Evaluating Pelvic Tilt Using the Pelvic Antero-Posterior Projection Images: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Pelvic tilt (PT) is a routinely evaluated parameter in hip and spine surgeries, and is usually measured on a sagittal pelvic radiograph. This may not always be feasible due to limitations such as landmark visibility, pelvic anomaly, and hardware presence. Tremendous efforts have been dedicated to using pelvic antero-posterior (AP) radiographs for assessing sagittal PT. Thus, this systematic review aimed to collect these methods and evaluate their performances.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers searched the PubMed, Ovid, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases in June 2023 with backward reference trailing (Google Scholar archive). There were 30 studies recruited. Risk of bias was assessed using the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool. The relevant data were tabulated in a standardized form for evaluating either the absolute PT or relative PT. Disagreement was resolved by discussing with the senior author.

RESULTS

There were 19 parameters from pelvic AP projection images involved, with 4 studies which used artificial intelligence, eyeball, or statistical shape method not involving a specific parameter. In comparing the PT values from pelvic sagittal images with those extrapolated from antero-posterior projection images, the highest correlation coefficient was found to be 0.91. The mean absolute difference (error) was 2.6°, with a maximum error reaching 10.9°. Most studies supported the feasibility of using AP parameters to calculate changes in PT.

CONCLUSIONS

No individual AP parameter was found to precisely estimate absolute PT. However, relative PT can be derived by evaluating serial AP radiographs of a patient in varying postures, employing any AP parameters.

The Sacro-femoral-pubic Angle Is Unreliable to Estimate Pelvic Tilt: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The accurate measurement of pelvic tilt is critical in hip and spine surgery. A sagittal pelvic radiograph is most often used to measure pelvic tilt, but this radiograph is not always routinely obtained and does not always allow the measurement of pelvic tilt because of problems with image quality or patient characteristics (such as high BMI or the presence of a spinal deformity). Although a number of recent studies have explored the correlation between pelvic tilt and the sacro-femoral-pubic angle using AP radiographs (SFP method), which aimed to estimate pelvic tilt without a sagittal radiograph, disagreement remains about whether the SFP method is sufficiently valid and reproducible for clinical use.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the correlation between SFP and pelvic tilt in the following groups: (1) overall cohort, (2) male and female cohort, and (3) skeletally mature and immature cohorts (young and adult groups, defined as patients older or younger than 20 years). Additionally, we assessed (4) the errors of SFP-estimated pelvic tilt angles and determined (5) measurement reproducibility using the intraclass correlation coefficient.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (record ID: CRD42022315673). PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were screened in July 2022. The following keywords were used: sacral femoral pubic, sacro femoral pubic, or SFP. The exclusion criteria were nonresearch articles such as commentaries or letters and studies that only investigated relative pelvic tilt rather than absolute pelvic tilt. Although the included studies had different patient recruitment strategies, study quality-wise, they all used an adequate amount of radiographs for landmark annotation and applied a correlation analysis for the relationship between the SFP angle and pelvic tilt. Thus, no risk of bias was found. Participant differences were mitigated via subgroup and sensitivity analyses to remove outliers. Publication bias was assessed using the p value of a two-tailed Egger regression test for the asymmetry of funnel plots, as well as the Duval and Tweedie trim and fill method for potential missing publications to impute true correlations. The extracted correlation coefficients r were pooled using the Fisher Z transformation with a significance level of 0.05. Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis, totaling 1247 patients. Four studies were used in the sex-controlled subgroup analysis (312 male and 460 female patients), and all nine studies were included in the age-controlled subgroup analysis (627 adults and 620 young patients). Moreover, a sex-controlled subgroup analysis was conducted in two studies with only young cohorts (190 young male patients and 220 young female patients).

RESULTS

The overall pooled correlation coefficient between SFP and pelvic tilt was 0.61, with high interstudy heterogeneity (I 2 = 76%); a correlation coefficient of 0.61 is too low for most clinical applications. The subgroup analysis showed that the female group had a higher correlation coefficient than the male group did (0.72 versus 0.65; p = 0.03), and the adult group had a higher correlation coefficient than the young group (0.70 versus 0.56; p < 0.01). Three studies reported erroneous information about the measured pelvic tilt and calculated pelvic tilt from the SFP angle. The mean absolute error was 4.6° ± 4.5°; in one study, 78% of patients (39 of 50) were within 5° of error, and in another study, the median absolute error was 5.8º, with the highest error at 28.8° (50 female Asian patients). The intrarater intraclass correlation coefficients ranged between 0.87 and 0.97 for the SFP angle and between 0.89 and 0.92 for the pelvic tilt angle, and the interrater intraclass correlation coefficients ranged between 0.84 and 1.00 for the SFP angle and 0.76 and 0.98 for the pelvic tilt angle. However, large confidence intervals were identified, suggesting considerable uncertainty in measurement at the individual radiograph level.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of the best-available evidence on this topic found the SFP method to be unreliable to extrapolate sagittal pelvic tilt in any patient group, and it was especially unreliable in the young male group (defined as patients younger than age 20 years). Correlation coefficients generally were too low for clinical use, but we remind readers that even a high correlation coefficient does not alone justify clinical application of a metric such as this, unless further subgroup analyses find low error and low heterogeneity, which was not the case here. Further ethnicity-segregated subgroup analyses with age, sex, and diagnosis controls could be useful in the future to determine whether there are some subgroups in which the SFP method is useful.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, diagnostic study.

Does pelvic tilt change with a peri-acetabular osteotomy?

Change in pelvic tilt (PT) during and after peri-acetabular osteotomy (PAO) is important for surgical planning. The aims of this study were to (i) determine how PT varies throughout the course of treatment in patients undergoing PAO, (ii) test what factors influence the change in PT and (iii) assess whether changes in PT influenced achieved correction. This is an retrospective, single-centre, consecutive case series of 111 patients treated with PAO for global (n = 79), posterior (n = 49) or anterior dysplasia (n = 6) (mean age: 27.3 ± 7.7 years; 85% females). PT was determined on supine, anteroposterior pelvic radiographs pre-, intra-, 1 day, 6 weeks and 1 year post-operatively, using the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle, a validated, surrogate marker of PT. An optimal acetabular correction was based on the lateral centre-edge angle (25°-40°), acetabular index (-5° to 10°) and cross-over ratio (<20%). There was a significant difference across pre- (70.1° ± 4.8°), 1-day (71.7° ± 4.3°; P < 0.001) and early post-operative SFP (70.6° ± 4.7°; P = 0.004). The difference in SPF between pre-operative and 1-year post-operative was -0.5° ± 3.1° (P = 0.043), with 9% of cases having a difference of >5°. The difference in SFP did not correlate with age, sex, body mass index, type of dysplasia or achievement of optimal acetabular correction (P = 0.1-0.9). In the early post-operative period, PT is reduced, leading to a relative appearance of acetabular retroversion, which gradually corrects and is restored by annual follow-up. The degree of change in PT during PAO did not adversely affect fragment orientation. PT does not significantly change in most patients undergoing PAO and therefore does not appear to be a compensatory mechanism.

Measurement of pelvic tilt and rotation on AP radiographs using HipRecon: Validation and comparison to other parameters

In this paper, we present and evaluate HipRecon, a noncommercial software package that simultaneously calculates pelvic tilt and rotation from an anteroposterior pelvis radiograph. We asked: What is the (1) accuracy and precision, (2) robustness, and (3) intra-/interobserver reliability/reproducibility of HipRecon to analyze both pelvic tilt and rotation on conventional AP pelvis radiographs? (4) How does the prediction of pelvic tilt on AP pelvis radiographs using HipRecon compare to established measurement methods? We compared the actual pelvic tilt of 20 adult human cadaveric pelvises with the calculated pelvic orientation based on an AP pelvis radiograph using HipRecon software. The pelvises were mounted on a radiolucent fixture and a total of 380 AP pelvis radiographs with different configurations were acquired. In addition, we investigated the correlation between actual tilt and the tilt calculated using HipRecon and seven other established measurement methods. The calculated software accuracy was 0.2 ± 2.0° (-3.6-4.1) for pelvic tilt and 0.0 ± 1.2° (-2.2-2.3, p = 0.39) for pelvic rotation. The Bland-Altman analysis showed values that were evenly and randomly spread in both directions. HipRecon showed excellent consistency for the measurement of pelvic tilt and rotation (intraobserver intraclass-correlation coefficient [ICC]: 0.99 [95% CI: 0.99-0.99] and interobserver ICC 0.99 [95% CI: 0.99-0.99]). Of all eight analyzed methods, the highest correlation coefficient was found for HipRecon (r = 0.98, p < 0.001). In the future, HipRecon could be used to detect changes in patient-specific pelvic orientation, helping to improve clinical understanding and decision-making in pathologies of the hip.

Pelvic tilt from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion of the hip

AIMS

Acetabular retroversion is a recognized cause of hip impingement and can be influenced by pelvic tilt (PT), which changes in different functional positions. Positional changes in PT have not previously been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion.

METHODS

Supine and standing anteroposterior (AP) pelvic radiographs were retrospectively analyzed in 69 patients treated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion. Measurements were made for acetabular index (AI), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), crossover index, ischial spine sign, and posterior wall sign. The change in the angle of PT was measured both by the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle and the pubic symphysis to sacroiliac (PS-SI) index.

RESULTS

In the supine position, the mean PT (by SFP) was 1.05° (SD 3.77°), which changed on standing to a PT of 8.64° (SD 5.34°). A significant increase in posterior PT from supine to standing of 7.59° (SD 4.5°; SFP angle) and 5.89° (SD 3.33°; PS-SI index) was calculated (p < 0.001). There was a good correlation in PT change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (0.901 in the preoperative group and 0.815 in the postoperative group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing radiographs compared to supine: crossover index (0.16 (SD 0.16) vs 0.38 (SD 0.15); p < 0.001), crossover sign (19/28 hips vs 28/28 hips; p < 0.001), ischial spine sign (10/28 hips vs 26/28 hips; p < 0.001), and posterior wall sign (12/28 hips vs 24/28 hips; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Posterior PT increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion. The features of acetabular retroversion were less evident on standing radiographs. The low PT angle in the supine position is a factor in the increased appearance of acetabular retroversion. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs to highlight signs of acetabular retroversion, and to assist with optimizing acetabular correction at the time of surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):786-791.

The accuracy in determining pelvic tilt from anteroposterior pelvic radiographs in patients awaiting hip arthroplasty

Spinopelvic mobility affects outcome after THA. Whether the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle, measured on AP radiographs, can be reliably used to estimate pelvic tilt (PT) in hip osteoarthritis patients is unknown. This study aimed to (1) validate the use of the SFP angle in the calculation of PT from AP radiographs, and (2) identify individual patient factors affecting the estimation of PT. A cohort of 100 patients awaiting THA for end-stage hip osteoarthritis was prospectively studied. AP and lateral radiographs, taken in the standing and relaxed-seated positions were evaluated for spinopelvic measurements (SFP, PT, and pelvic incidence [PI]). To validate the SFP angle, estimated PT values using the formula [PT = 75°-SFP] were compared to the true, measured values from the lateral radiographs. Despite good agreement for the estimated and true PT (16.2 ± 5.9° vs. 15.5 ± 8.6°; p = .315), a significantly poorer agreement could be found between the two methods at high or low values of PT. Patient-specific PI correlated with the difference between the two measurement methods (Pearson's r = -0.644; p < .001). However, the change in SFP angle equaled approximately the change in pelvic tilt (∆PT = 2°-∆SFP; Pearson's r = -0.934; p < .001). Absolute values for the sagittal PT should not be estimated from AP pelvic radiographs in patients awaiting total hip arthroplasty. However, the relative change in PT between different positions equals approximately the change in SFP angle. This may allow functional cup orientation after THA to be determined between different postures from an AP radiograph of the pelvis. The SFP angle has moderate accuracy in determining a patient's pelvic tilt; however, it can accurately determine a patient's change in pelvic tilt in different positions.

Reliability and Reproducibility of Sacro-Femoro-Pubic Angle Measurements on Anteroposterior Pelvis Radiographs

Background

The sacro-femoro-pubic (SFP) angle is a surrogate measurement for pelvic tilt obtained on anteroposterior (AP) pelvis radiographs. It is unknown whether the SFP angle can be measured reliably by senior surgeons and trainees alike.

Methods

We conducted an intrareader and interreader reliability study using preoperative AP pelvis radiographs. Using our hospital electronic database, we randomly selected 31 subjects undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty. An attending orthopedic surgeon and two orthopedic surgery residents performed two separate SFP angle measurements for each subject. Intrareader and interreader agreement were measured using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).

Results

Pairwise intrareader and interreader ICCs ranged from 0.91 to 0.99. Overall ICC was 0.94. Interreader ICCs between the attending surgeon and each orthopedic resident were 0.93 and 0.98, and the ICC between orthopedic residents was 0.91. Interreader mean differences for SFP angle measurements were 2.32 degrees or less: -2.03 (standard deviation: 2.23) and 0.29 (1.64) between the attending surgeon and each orthopedic resident, and 2.32 (2.44) between orthopedic residents.

Conclusion

SFP angle may be measured reliably on AP pelvis radiographs by senior clinicians and trainees. SFP angle measurement may prove helpful as an alternative to pelvic tilt measurements when lateral pelvic radiographs are not available.

Posterior pelvic tilt evolution in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. A minimum 5-years follow-up clinico-radiological study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pelvic tilt influences the relative position between total hip arthroplasty (THA) components. Changes in lumbar spine over time may affect clinical and radiological outcomes of THA during follow-up. We assessed the evolution of pelvic tilt and cup position after THA for a minimum follow-up of five years and the possible appearance of complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study includes 48 patients operated between 2008 and 2012. Clinical data, complication and radiological analysis included sacro-femoral-pubic and acetabular abduction angles on the anteroposterior pelvic view; and cup anteversion angle on the lateral cross-table hip view according to Woo and Morrey. All assessments were done pre-operatively and at 6 weeks, one, two and five years post-operatively.

RESULTS

Mean sacro-femoral-pubic decreased from 60.6∘ preoperatively to 58.8∘ at five years (p > .05), more in females (from 63.3 to 59.3) than males (58.7 to 58.3). Acetabular abduction increased from 47.3 at six-week postoperatively to 48.2 at five years (p > .05) and acetabular anteversion varied from 24.3∘ to 36.1∘ (p < .04). There were four dislocations: one late recurrent dislocation which required cup revision.

CONCLUSION

Despite the sacro-femoral-pubic angle tendency to decrease and anteversion tendency to increase after five years, larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm the potential increasing in long term complications.

Radiophobia Overreaction: College of Chiropractors of British Columbia Revoke Full X-Ray Rights Based on Flawed Study and Radiation Fear-Mongering

Fears over radiation have created irrational pressures to dissuade radiography use within chiropractic. Recently, the regulatory body for chiropractors practicing in British Columbia, Canada, the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia (CCBC), contracted Pierre Côté to review the clinical use of X-rays within the chiropractic profession. A "rapid review" was performed and published quickly and included only 9 papers, the most recent dating from 2005; they concluded, "Given the inherent risks of radiation, we recommend that chiropractors do not use radiographs for the routine and repeat evaluation of the structure and function of the spine." The CCBC then launched an immediate review of the use of X-rays by chiropractors in their jurisdiction. Member and public opinion were gathered but not presented to their members. On February 4, 2021, the College announced amendments to their Professional Conduct Handbook that revoked X-ray rights for routine/repeat assessment and management of patients with spine disorders. Here, we highlight current and historical evidence that substantiates that X-rays are not a public health threat. We also point out critical and insurmountable flaws in the single paper used to support irrational and unscientific policy that discriminates against chiropractors who practice certain forms of evidence-based X-ray-guided methods.

What is the pelvic tilt in acetabular dysplasia and does it change following peri-acetabular osteotomy?

To quantify the pelvic tilt (PT) in patients with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia and determine if it represents a compensatory mechanism to improve femoral head coverage, we studied a cohort of 16 patients undergoing 32 bilateral staged PAOs for acetabular dysplasia and compared this to a matched cohort of 32 patients undergoing PAO for unilateral acetabular dysplasia all with >1 year follow-up. The change in PT was determined with two validated methods, namely, the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle and the pubic symphysis to sacroiliac index (PS-SI). Despite an improvement in the lateral centre-edge and Tönnis angles to within normal limits following PAO, patients with unilateral and bilateral acetabular dysplasia have similar PT pre-operatively (8° ± 5°) and post-operatively (9° ± 5°). A change of >5° was observed in only six patients (13%) using the SFP angle, and five patients (10%) using the PS-SI, all increased (posterior rotation of the pelvis). No patients were observed to have a change in PT >10°. The observed PT in our study group is equivalent to that found in the normal population and in patient with symptomatic acetabular retroversion. These findings all suggest that PT is morphological rather than a result of a compensatory mechanism, and even if it was compensatory, it does not appear to reverse significantly following PAO. The target for acetabular reorientation, therefore, remains constant.

Pelvic motion the key to understanding spine-hip interaction

Pelvic motion acting as a hinge between the spine and hips is essential to maintain proper balance during bipedalism. Pelvic rotation is recruited as a compensation mechanism when spinal malalignment occurs.This pelvic rotation can affect functional acetabular orientation, and consequently functional cup positioning if a total hip arthroplasty (THA) is needed. Pelvic retroversion, frequently associated with degenerative spinal changes, implies an increase of acetabular version.Patients with flexible lumbar spines (spine users) protect the hip joint. Patients with stiff, degenerated or fused lumbar spines (hip users) demand higher hip mobility, placing the THA at risk.Pelvises in retroversion place the THA at risk for anterior dislocation when standing. In contrast, pelvises in anteversion or with low pelvic incidence (PI) can place THA at risk for posterior dislocation when sitting.Try to set the cup in an anatomic position. However, bear in mind that low PI pelvises may need more acetabular ante-inclination, and high PI pelvises more acetabular retroversion.If surgery is needed, start first by addressing the hip, except in patients with compensation (high pelvic retroversion), who may need spine surgery first to place the pelvis, and consequently the acetabulum, in a proper position. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:522-533. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.200032.

Does Functional Cup Orientation Change at Minimum of 10 Years After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Cup orientation has been shown to influence the postoperative risk of impingement and dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and may change over time due to changes in pelvic tilt that occur with aging. The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a significant change in acetabular cup inclination and anteversion over a 10-year period following THA.

METHODS

A retrospective, multisurgeon, single-center cohort study was conducted of 46 patients that underwent THA between 1995 and 2002. A total of 46 patients were included, with a median age at surgery of 56 years, and a median time between initial postoperative radiograph and the most recent one being 13.5 years (minimum 10 years). Cup orientation was measured from postoperative and follow-up supine anterior-posterior pelvic radiographs. Using a validated software, inclination and anteversion were calculated at each interval and the change in cup anteversion and inclination angle was determined. Furthermore, the difference in the sacro-femoral-pubic angle was measured, reflecting the difference in pelvic tilt between intervals.

RESULTS

No significant difference was detected between measurements taken from initial postoperative radiograph and measurements a minimum of 10 years later (P > .45), with the median (interquartile range) change in anteversion, inclination, and sacro-femoral-pubic being 0° (-1° to 3°), 1° (-3° to 2°), and 0° (-2° to 3°), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study found no significant change in functional cup orientation a minimum of 10 years after THA. No shifts in functional cup orientation as a result of altering spinopelvic alignment seemed to be present over a 10-year period.

Can measurements from an anteroposterior radiograph predict pelvic sagittal inclination?

Pelvic sagittal inclination (PSI) is often evaluated in patients with hip pathology using lateral radiographs. However, it would be useful if PSI could be predicted from an anteroposterior radiograph since this film is ubiquitous in the evaluation of hip pathology. Herein, computer-modeling was applied to predict PSI from radiographic measurements assessed in the anteroposterior plane. Three-dimensional surface models of the pelvis, femur, and sacrum were reconstructed from computed tomography images of 50 women with hip dysplasia. This study cohort was selected as changes in PSI alter femoral head coverage, which is relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of hip dysplasia, a known cause of hip osteoarthritis. Five radiographic parameters commonly used to independently estimate PSI were evaluated after bone surfaces were projected to an anteroposterior plane, including the symphysis to sacrococcygeal joint distance (S-S distance), the pelvic foramen aspect ratio (PF ratio), the distance between the symphysis and a line connecting the femoral head centers (S-H distance), the sacro-femoral-pubic angle (SFP angle), and the pelvic vertical ratio (PVR). Regression models determined the ability of these parameters to predict PSI from -20° to 20° at 1° increment. All five parameters showed a strong correlation with the PSI (all r > 0.9). From the regression models, PSI was estimated with a median (maximum) absolute error of 3.6° (18.4°), 3.8° (17.7°), 5.2° (17.9°), 5.8° (28.8°), and 3.2° (23.5°) for the S-S distance, PF ratio, S-H distance, SFP angle, and PVR, respectively. The regression model for S-S distance had a mean slope of 2.18 that ranged from 1.98 to 2.41 when the sacrococcygeal joint was located superior to the symphysis. Results indicated that substantial errors occur when estimating the actual value of PSI from an anteroposterior radiograph. However, the change in PSI could be estimated from the S-S distance, which may aid surgeons to successfully increase head coverage through periacetabular osteotomy and to locate the acetabular cup in a functional position for total hip arthroplasty.

The Berbeo-Sardi Angle (BSA): An Innovative Method to Effectively Estimate Pelvic Retroversion in Anteroposterior Radiographs-A Correlation With Traditional Parameters

STUDY

Design: Diagnostic studies-concordance between diagnostic tests.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to develop a novel spinopelvic parameter (Berbeo-Sardi angle [BSA], the angle formed at the intersection of a line that connects the inferior margin of the sacroiliac joint to the midpoint of a horizontal line joining both femoral heads) measurable in anteroposterior radiographs that indirectly estimates pelvic retroversion and correlates with traditional measurements like pelvic tilt (PT).

SUMMARY

Sagittal balance appraisal and surgical planning rely on the interpretation of spinopelvic parameters. An increased PT reflects pelvic retroversion as a compensatory mechanism to limit sagittal imbalance and correlates with increased pain and disability. However, poor imaging techniques and incorrect patient positioning frequently hamper landmark identification in lateral radiographs, and with no measurable angles in anteroposterior radiographs, it is often impossible to determine PT and pelvic retroversion.

METHODS

Whole-spine radiographs from 105 consecutive patients were used to retrospectively measure conventional spinopelvic parameters and the BSA. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess a quantitative correlation between the PT and BSA as indirect measures of pelvic retroversion.

RESULTS

Average values for pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, PT, and BSA were 46.5° (±10.23), 48.56° (±12.30), 29.97° (±9.77), 16.94° (±8.03), and 54.47° (±4.05), respectively. We encountered a moderately strong correlation (r = -0.66) between PT and BSA. Receiver operating characteristic plot analysis revealed that a BSA threshold of 46° has a sensitivity of 90% to identify pathologic PT values (>20°), whereas a BSA ≥60° has a specificity of 90% to rule out pelvic retroversion using anteroposterior radiographs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a moderately strong correlation between the BSA, an innovative spinopelvic parameter measurable in anteroposterior radiographs, and PT. BSA seems to show great promise in simplifying spinopelvic appraisal by easily estimating pelvic retroversion associated with sagittal imbalance, while avoiding image-quality issues often encountered in lateral radiographs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.