A Cadaveric Study of Cam-Type Femoroacetabular Impingement: Biomechanical Comparison of Contact Pressures Between Cam Morphology, Partial Femoral Osteoplasty, and Complete Femoral Osteoplasty


      To compare the biomechanical properties of the hip joint with an intact femoral cam lesion, partial cam resection, and complete cam resection.


      A cadaveric study was performed using 8 hemipelvises with cam-type morphology (alpha angle > 55°) and intact labra. Intra-articular pressure maps were produced for each specimen under the following conditions: (1) native cam morphology (intact), (2) cam morphology with incomplete resection (partial), and (3) cam morphology with complete resection (complete). By use of an open technique, resection of the superior portion of the cam morphology was performed with a 5.5-mm burr to create the partial resection, followed by the inferior portion to create the complete resection. In each condition, 3 biomechanical parameters were obtained: contact pressure, contact area, and peak force within a region of interest. Measurements were performed 3 times in each condition, and the average value was used for statistical analysis. Analysis of variance was used to compare biomechanical parameters between conditions.


      A statistically significant difference was found between the pre- and post-resection alpha angles (62.2° ± 3.9° vs 40.9° ± 1.4°, P < .001). Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed that the normalized average pressure values of hips with complete resection of cam lesions were significantly lower than those of hips with incomplete femoral cam lesions and hips with intact cam morphology (100% vs 93.6% ± 8.3% and 82.6% ± 16.2%, respectively; P < .0001). The percentage reduction of contact pressure in the complete and partial groups was 17.4% and 6.4%, respectively, compared with the intact group. Contact area and peak force showed no statistically significant differences across the 3 conditions (P > .05).


      Complete cam resection results in significantly lower intra-articular hip contact pressures than incomplete cam resection and native cam morphology in a cadaveric hip model. These observations underscore the importance of ensuring complete resection of femoral cam lesions in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

      Clinical Relevance

      Previous studies have shown that the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome is incomplete femoral cam resection during the index operation. This study shows biomechanical differences associated with partial cam resection compared with the complete cam resection state that may translate to persistent symptoms.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Arthroscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Gwathmey F.W.
        • Jones K.S.
        • Thomas Byrd J.W.
        Revision hip arthroscopy: Findings and outcomes.
        J Hip Preserv Surg. 2017; 4: 318-323
        • Cvetanovich G.L.
        • Harris J.D.
        • Erickson B.J.
        • Bach Jr., B.R.
        • Bush-Joseph C.A.
        • Nho S.J.
        Revision hip arthroscopy: A systematic review of diagnoses, operative findings, and outcomes.
        Arthroscopy. 2015; 31: 1382-1390
        • Ross J.R.
        • Larson C.M.
        • Adeoye O.
        • Kelly B.T.
        • Bedi A.
        Residual deformity is the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy: A three-dimensional CT study.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473: 1388-1395
        • Bogunovic L.
        • Gottlieb M.
        • Pashos G.
        • Baca G.
        • Clohisy J.C.
        Why do hip arthroscopy procedures fail?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471: 2523-2529
        • Clohisy J.C.
        • Nepple J.J.
        • Larson C.M.
        • Zaltz I.
        • Millis M.
        Academic Network of Conservation Hip Outcome Research M. Persistent structural disease is the most common cause of repeat hip preservation surgery.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471: 3788-3794
        • Larson C.M.
        • Giveans M.R.
        • Samuelson K.M.
        • Stone R.M.
        • Bedi A.
        Arthroscopic hip revision surgery for residual femoroacetabular impingement (FAI): Surgical outcomes compared with a matched cohort after primary arthroscopic FAI correction.
        Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42: 1785-1790
        • Buckwalter J.A.
        • Anderson D.D.
        • Brown T.D.
        • Tochigi Y.
        • Martin J.A.
        The roles of mechanical stresses in the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis: Implications for treatment of joint injuries.
        Cartilage. 2013; 4: 286-294
        • Russell M.E.
        • Shivanna K.H.
        • Grosland N.M.
        • Pedersen D.R.
        Cartilage contact pressure elevations in dysplastic hips: A chronic overload model.
        J Orthop Surg Res. 2006; 1: 6
        • Cooperman D.R.
        How good is the evidence linking acetabular dysplasia to osteoarthritis?.
        J Pediatr Orthop. 2019; 39: S20-S22
        • Liu Q.
        • Wang W.
        • Thoreson A.R.
        • Zhao C.
        • Zhu W.
        • Dou P.
        Finite element prediction of contact pressures in cam-type femoroacetabular impingement with varied alpha angles.
        Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2017; 20: 294-301
        • Ng K.C.
        • Mantovani G.
        • Lamontagne M.
        • Labrosse M.R.
        • Beaule P.E.
        Increased hip stresses resulting from a cam deformity and decreased femoral neck-shaft angle during level walking.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475: 998-1008
        • Ng K.C.
        • Lamontagne M.
        • Labrosse M.R.
        • Beaule P.E.
        Hip joint stresses due to cam-type femoroacetabular impingement: A systematic review of finite element simulations.
        PLoS One. 2016; 11e0147813
        • Rakhra K.S.
        • Sheikh A.M.
        • Allen D.
        • Beaule P.E.
        Comparison of MRI alpha angle measurement planes in femoroacetabular impingement.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 467: 660-665
        • Nepple J.J.
        • Martel J.M.
        • Kim Y.J.
        • Zaltz I.
        • Clohisy J.C.
        • Group A.S.
        Do plain radiographs correlate with CT for imaging of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 470: 3313-3320
        • Chadayammuri V.
        • Garabekyan T.
        • Jesse M.K.
        • et al.
        Measurement of lateral acetabular coverage: A comparison between CT and plain radiography.
        J Hip Preserv Surg. 2015; 2: 392-400
        • Krebs V.
        • Incavo S.J.
        • Shields W.H.
        The anatomy of the acetabulum: What is normal?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 467: 868-875
        • Lee S.
        • Wuerz T.H.
        • Shewman E.
        • et al.
        Labral reconstruction with iliotibial band autografts and semitendinosus allografts improves hip joint contact area and contact pressure: An in vitro analysis.
        Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43: 98-104
        • Sardana V.
        • Philippon M.J.
        • de Sa D.
        • et al.
        Revision hip arthroscopy indications and outcomes: A systematic review.
        Arthroscopy. 2015; 31: 2047-2055
        • Stone A.V.
        • Malloy P.
        • Beck E.C.
        • et al.
        Predictors of persistent postoperative pain at minimum 2 years after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.
        Am J Sports Med. 2019; 47: 552-559
        • Konan S.
        • Rhee S.J.
        • Haddad F.S.
        Hip arthroscopy: Analysis of a single surgeon's learning experience.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93: 52-56
        • Suslak A.G.
        • Mather III, R.C.
        • Kelly B.T.
        • Nho S.J.
        Improved arthroscopic visualization of peripheral compartment.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2012; 1: e57-e62
        • Matsuda D.K.
        The case for cam surveillance: The arthroscopic detection of cam femoroacetabular impingement missed on preoperative imaging and its significance.
        Arthroscopy. 2011; 27: 870-876
        • Ejnisman L.
        • Philippon M.J.
        • Lertwanich P.
        Femoroacetabular impingement: The femoral side.
        Clin Sports Med. 2011; 30: 369-377
        • Uemura K.
        • Atkins P.R.
        • Anderson A.E.
        • Aoki S.K.
        Do your routine radiographs to diagnose cam femoroacetabular impingement visualize the region of the femoral head-neck junction you intended?.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 1796-1806
        • Nho S.J.
        • Beck E.C.
        Editorial commentary: If you can't see it, you can't treat it: Proper hip radiographic views are critical.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 1807-1808
        • Beck E.C.
        • Alter T.
        • Mehta N.
        • et al.
        Contemporary hip capsular management and closure using a suture passing device.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2019; 8: e947-e952
        • Nho S.J.
        • Beck E.C.
        • Kunze K.N.
        • Okoroha K.
        • Suppauksorn S.
        Contemporary management of the hip capsule during arthroscopic hip preservation surgery.
        Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2019; : 260-270
        • Rego P.
        • Beaule P.E.
        • Ayeni O.R.
        • et al.
        Femoroacetabular impingement: What the surgeon wants to know.
        Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2019; 23: 257-275

      Linked Article

      • Erratum
        ArthroscopyVol. 36Issue 10
        • Preview
          In the article “A Cadaveric Study of Cam-Type Femoroacetabular Impingement: Biomechanical Comparison of Contact Pressures Between Cam Morphology, Partial Femoral Osteoplasty, and Complete Femoral Osteoplasty,” published in the September 2020 issue (Arthroscopy 2020;36:2425-2432), the name of author Laura M. Krivicich was misspelled. The article has since been corrected online.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF