Literature DB >> 19723994

Medium-term outcome of periacetabular osteotomy and predictors of conversion to total hip replacement.

Anders Troelsen1, Brian Elmengaard, Kjeld Søballe.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Little is known about medium or long-term results of periacetabular osteotomy and which factors predict a poor outcome in terms of conversion to total hip replacement. The aims of this study were to assess the medium-term outcome following periacetabular osteotomy and to analyze what radiographic and patient-related factors predict a poor outcome.
METHODS: One hundred and sixteen periacetabular osteotomies performed by the senior author from December 1998 to December 2002 were eligible for inclusion. Data were assessed through database inquiry and evaluation of radiographic material. The mean duration of follow-up was 6.8 years. At the time of follow-up, we conducted an interview, performed clinical and radiographic examinations, and asked the patients to complete the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and the Short Form-36 questionnaires. We performed a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and we used a Cox proportional hazards model to identify factors predicting a poor outcome.
RESULTS: With conversion to total hip replacement as the end point, the Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a hip survival rate of 81.6% (95% confidence interval, 69.7% to 89.3%) at 9.2 years. At the time of follow-up, the median physical component score on the Short Form-36 was 48.31, the median mental component score on the Short Form-36 was 57.95, and the median Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index total score was 84.44. The median pain score on the visual analog scale was 0 at rest and 1 after fifteen minutes of normal walking. When adjusting for preoperative osteoarthritis, we identified seven factors predicting conversion to total hip replacement. Preoperative predictive factors were severe dysplasia on conventional radiographs and computed tomographic scans, reduced acetabular anteversion angle on computed tomographic scans, and the presence of an os acetabuli (calcification of a detached labrum). Predictive factors identified on the immediate postoperative radiographs were a small width of the acetabular sclerotic zone and excessive lateral and proximal dislocation.
CONCLUSIONS: Periacetabular osteotomy can be performed with a good outcome at medium-term follow-up, suggesting that it may be applied by experienced surgeons with satisfactory results. To further improve the outcome, focus should be on the potential negative influence of parameters that are easily assessed, such as the preoperative grade of osteoarthritis, the presence of an os acetabuli, and severe acetabular dysplasia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19723994     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00994

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  63 in total

1.  Report of breakout session: Intraarticular work during periacetabular osteotomy--simultaneous arthrotomy or hip arthroscopy?

Authors:  Christopher L Peters; Rafael J Sierra
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  The Bernese periacetabular osteotomy for treatment of adult hip dysplasia.

Authors:  Todd O McKinley
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Classifications in Brief: Tönnis Classification of Hip Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Boris Kovalenko; Prashoban Bremjit; Navin Fernando
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Does previous pelvic osteotomy compromise the results of periacetabular osteotomy surgery?

Authors:  Jeffrey B Stambough; John C Clohisy; Geneva R Baca; Ira Zaltz; Robert Trousdale; Michael Millis; Daniel Sucato; Young-Jo Kim; Ernest Sink; Perry L Schoenecker; Rafael Sierra; David Podeszwa; Paul Beaulé
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Are there sex-dependent differences in acetabular dysplasia characteristics?

Authors:  Stephen T Duncan; Ljiljana Bogunovic; Geneva Baca; Perry L Schoenecker; John C Clohisy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Do fluoroscopy and postoperative radiographs correlate for periacetabular osteotomy corrections?

Authors:  Charles L Lehmann; Jeffrey J Nepple; Geneva Baca; Perry L Schoenecker; John C Clohisy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Impingement adversely affects 10-year survivorship after periacetabular osteotomy for DDH.

Authors:  Christoph E Albers; Simon D Steppacher; Reinhold Ganz; Moritz Tannast; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-01-25       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Periacetabular Osteotomy Improves Pain and Function in Patients With Lateral Center-edge Angle Between 18° and 25°, but Are These Hips Really Borderline Dysplastic?

Authors:  Michael P McClincy; James D Wylie; Young-Jo Kim; Michael B Millis; Eduardo N Novais
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 9.  Bernese periacetabular osteotomy for hip dysplasia: Surgical technique and indications.

Authors:  Atul F Kamath
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2016-05-18

10.  Preservation of the rectus femoris origin during periacetabular osteotomy does not compromise acetabular reorientation.

Authors:  Christopher L Peters; Jill A Erickson; Mike B Anderson; Lucas A Anderson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.