| Literature DB >> 24895616 |
Masood Umer1, Haroon Rashid1, Hafiz Muhammad Umer2, Hasnain Raza1.
Abstract
Hip joint instability can be secondary to congenital hip pathologies like developmental dysplasia (DDH) or acquired such as sequel of infective or neoplastic process. An unstable hip is usually associated with loss of bone from the proximal femur, proximal migration of the femur, lower-extremity length discrepancy, abnormal gait, and pain. In this case series of 37 patients coming to our institution between May 2005 and December 2011, we report our results in treatment of unstable hip joint by hip reconstruction osteotomy using the Ilizarov method and apparatus. This includes an acute valgus and extension osteotomy of the proximal femur combined with gradual varus and distraction (if required) for realignment and lengthening at a second, more distal, femoral osteotomy. 18 males and 19 females participated in the study. There were 17 patients with DDH, 12 with sequelae of septic arthritis, 2 with tuberculous arthritis, 4 with posttraumatic arthritis, and 2 with focal proximal femoral deficiency. Outcomes were evaluated by using Harris Hip Scoring system. At the mean follow-up of 37 months, Harris Hip Score had significantly improved in all patients. To conclude, illizarov hip reconstruction can successfully improve Trendelenburg's gait. It supports the pelvis and simultaneously restores knee alignment and corrects lower-extremity length discrepancy (LLD).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24895616 PMCID: PMC4033345 DOI: 10.1155/2014/835681
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Level of proximal osteotomy. This figure was reproduced and modified from Dr. Paley's textbook Paley D. Principles of Deformity Correction, Springer, 2005, after his permission.
Figure 2Level of distal osteotomy. This figure was reproduced and modified from Dr. Paley's textbook Paley D. Principles of Deformity Correction, Springer, 2005, after his permission.
Figure 3(a) Postoperative radiographs. (b) Postoperative radiograph after frame removal.
Figure 4Patient after application of Ilizarov method.
Figure 5Follow-up after Ilizarov removal.
Shows summary of results.
| Pre-operative | Post-operative |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hip flexion (degrees) | Mean = 40.1 | Mean = 120.0 | .05 |
| (Range = 10–100) | (Range = 70–130) | ||
| Hip abduction (degrees) | Mean = 7.7 | Mean = 23.7 | .02 |
| (Range = 0–30) | (Range = 13–30) | ||
| Harris Hip score | Mean = 46.4 | Mean = 87.7 | .03 |
| (Range = 3–78) | (Range = 72–98) | ||
| LLD (cm) | Mean = 6.6 | Mean = 1.0 | .0001 |
| (Range = 0–23) | (Range = 0–11) |
Complications.
|
| |
|---|---|
| No complications | 17 |
| Major complications | |
| Extension contracture at knee | 3 |
| Non-union | 2 |
| Fracture | 1 |
| Minor complications (pin tract infection) | 14 |
Compares our results with other studies.
| Our study |
Marimuthu et al.'s study [ | Mahran et al.'s study [ | Emara's study [ | EL-Mowafi's study [ | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample size | 37 | 12 | 29 | 11 | 25 | |||||
| Pre-op | Post-op | Pre-op | Post-op | Pre-op | Post-op | Pre-op | Post-op | Pre-op | Post-op | |
| LLD | 6.6 (0–23) | 1.0 (0–11) | 5.1 (2.5–6.8) | 0.90 (0–3) | 6.90 (4–11) | 1.10 (0–3.5) | Length gained-4.9 cm | 5.3 (3–8) | 0.00 (0-0) | |
| Range (3–7) | ||||||||||
| Harris Hip Score | 47 (3–78) | 87 (72–98) | 44 (14–73) | 70 (60–86) | — | 43 (31–50) | 71 (65–80) | 55 (40–78) | 81 (65–90) | |
| ROM Flexion | 40.1 (10–100) | 120.0 (70–130) | 88.3 (70–120) | 70.4 (45–105) | 87.7 (30–40) | 72.2 (30–120) | 90.0 (80–120) | 124 (100–140) | 90 (40–120) | 127 (100–140) |
| ROM Abduction | 7.7 (0–30) | 23.7 (13–30) | 12.1 (0–25) | 22.5 (15–35) | 37.7 (10–70) | 45.7 (15–75) | 8.0 (0–15) | 22.0 (10–30) | 8.0 (0–15) | 30.0 (10–50) |