Functional and radiological outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy for hip dysplasia in patients under fifty years using a minimally invasive approach-a single surgeon series with a minimum follow up of two years.
Hip dysplasia
Hip preservation surgery
Outcome measures
Periacetabular osteotomy
Journal
International orthopaedics
ISSN: 1432-5195
Titre abrégé: Int Orthop
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7705431
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Feb 2024
26 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
28
12
2022
accepted:
15
01
2024
medline:
26
2
2024
pubmed:
26
2
2024
entrez:
26
2
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data to evaluate (1) the extent of surgical correction following minimally invasive periacetabular osteotomy, (2) improvements in functional outcomes and any potential predictors for favourable outcome, and (3) complications after minimally invasive periacetabular osteotomy. A total of 352 minimally invasive periacetabular osteotomy procedures were performed on 312 hip dysplasia patients between 2013 and 2020. Radiological parameters such as lateral centre edge angle, acetabular index, and Tönnis grade of arthritis were calculated. Patients also completed a range of patient reported outcome measures. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were performed to assess for differences between patient reported outcome measures and radiological outcomes across the follow-up periods. Univariate linear regression and logistic regression were used to assess for predictors of change in functional outcome. Patients had a significant correction in mean lateral centre edge angle from 17.2° to 35.3° (p < 0.001) and mean acetabular index from 13.2° to - 0.82°. At one year follow-up all patient reported outcome measures were significantly greater than their baseline measurements and this improvement was maintained at two years. Changes in patient reported outcome measures were independent of radiological parameters such as change in the lateral centre edge angle and acetabular index, pre-operative Tönnis grade, and patient factors such as age and sex. A total of 5.11% of patients developed post-operative complications, with four requiring posterior column fixation. Four patients (1.12%) needed a total hip replacement. Minimally invasive periacetabular osteotomy is a safe procedure that provides significant functional outcome improvements following surgery at six months which is maintained at two years. More than three-fourths of patients achieved improvement of iHOT-12 score beyond the minimal clinically important difference and more than half of the patients achieved substantial clinical benefit for iHOT-12 score.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38407597
doi: 10.1007/s00264-024-06094-8
pii: 10.1007/s00264-024-06094-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Tannast M, Hanke MS, Zheng G et al (2015) What are the radiographic reference values for acetabular under- and overcoverage? Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:1234–1246. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-014-4038-3
doi: 10.1007/S11999-014-4038-3
pubmed: 25384429
Müller M, Rakow A, Wassilew GI et al (2019) Prediction of time to prosthesis implantation as a function of joint anatomy in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Orthop Surg Res 14(1):471. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13018-019-1511-4
Khan OH, Malviya A, Subramanian P et al (2017) Minimally invasive periacetabular osteotomy using a modified Smith-Petersen approach: technique and early outcomes. Bone Joint J 99–B:22–28. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0439.R1
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0439.R1
pubmed: 28053253
Ganz R, Klaue K, Vink TS, Mast JW (1988) A new periacetabular osteotomy for the treatment of hip dysplasias. Technique and preliminary results - PubMed. Clin Orthop Relat Res 232:26–36
doi: 10.1097/00003086-198807000-00006
Ramírez-Núñez L, Payo-Ollero J, Comas M et al (2020) Periacetabular osteotomy for hip dysplasia treatment through a mini-invasive technique. Our results at mid-term in 131 cases. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol (English ed) 64:151–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RECOT.2020.01.003
doi: 10.1016/J.RECOT.2020.01.003
Larsen JB, Mechlenburg I, Jakobsen SS et al (2020) 14-year hip survivorship after periacetabular osteotomy: a follow-up study on 1,385 hips. Acta Orthop 91:299–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1731159
doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1731159
pubmed: 32106751
pmcid: 8023930
Ziran N, Varcadipane J, Kadri O et al (2019) Ten- and 20-year survivorship of the hip after periacetabular osteotomy for acetabular dysplasia. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 27:247–255. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00810
doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00810
pubmed: 30433888
Steppacher SD, Tannast M, Ganz R, Siebenrock KA (2008) Mean 20-year followup of Bernese periacetabular osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:1633–1644. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-008-0242-3
doi: 10.1007/S11999-008-0242-3
pubmed: 18449617
pmcid: 2505253
Troelsen A, Elmengaard B, Søballe K (2008) A new minimally invasive transsartorial approach for periacetabular osteotomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:493–498. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.01399
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.01399
pubmed: 18310698
Ali M, Malviya A (2020) Complications and outcome after periacetabular osteotomy - influence of surgical approach. Hip Int 30:4–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1120700019871195
doi: 10.1177/1120700019871195
pubmed: 31526038
Luo D, Zhang H, Zhang W (2016) Comparison of three approaches of Bernese periacetabular osteotomy. Ther Clin Risk Manag 12:67–72. https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S81914
doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S81914
pubmed: 26834479
pmcid: 4716747
Zhang D, Pan X, Zhang H et al (2020) The lateral center-edge angle as radiographic selection criteria for periacetabular osteotomy for developmental dysplasia of the hip in patients aged above 13 years. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 21(1):493. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12891-020-03515-8
doi: 10.1186/S12891-020-03515-8
pubmed: 32711501
pmcid: 7382803
Direito-Santos B, França G, Nunes J et al (2018) Acetabular retroversion: diagnosis and treatment. EFORT Open Rev 3:595–603. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.3.180015
doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180015
pubmed: 30595845
pmcid: 6275849
Tönnis D, Heinecke A (1999) Acetabular and femoral anteversion: relationship with osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1747–1770. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199912000-00014
doi: 10.2106/00004623-199912000-00014
pubmed: 10608388
Martin RRL, Kivlan BR, Christoforetti JJ et al (2019) Minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit values for the 12-Item international hip outcome tool. Arthroscopy 35:411–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTHRO.2018.09.028
doi: 10.1016/J.ARTHRO.2018.09.028
pubmed: 30612776
Holleyman R, Sohatee MA, Witt J et al (2020) Periacetabular osteotomy for developmental dysplasia of the hip and femoroacetabular impingement: a study using the U.K. Non-Arthroplasty Hip Registry (NAHR) data set. J Bone Joint Surg Am 102:1312–1320. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.01387
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.01387
pubmed: 32769597
Petrie JR, Novais EN, An TW et al (2020) What Is the impact of periacetabular osteotomy surgery on patient function and activity levels? J Arthroplasty 35:S113–S118. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ARTH.2020.03.002
doi: 10.1016/J.ARTH.2020.03.002
pubmed: 32241651
Clohisy JC, Ackerman J, Baca G et al (2017) Patient-reported outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy from the prospective ANCHOR cohort study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:33–41. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.15.00798
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00798
pubmed: 28060231
pmcid: 5198872
Matheney T, Kim YJ, Zurakowski D et al (2010) Intermediate to long-term results following the bernese periacetabular osteotomy and predictors of clinical outcome: surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(Suppl 1 Pt 2):115–129. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.00646
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00646
pubmed: 20844169
Boje J, Caspersen CK, Jakobsen SS et al (2019) Are changes in pain associated with changes in quality of life and hip function 2 years after periacetabular osteotomy? A follow-up study of 321 patients. J Hip Preserv Surg 6:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/JHPS/HNZ009
doi: 10.1093/JHPS/HNZ009
pubmed: 31069098
pmcid: 6501443
Fan Y, Li W, Wu Y et al (2021) The association the patient-reported outcomes after periacetabular osteotomy with radiographic features: a short-term retrospective study. J Orthop Surg Res 16(1):718. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13018-021-02858-9
doi: 10.1186/S13018-021-02858-9
pubmed: 34924013
pmcid: 8684642
Novais EN, Duncan S, Nepple J et al (2017) Do radiographic parameters of dysplasia improve to normal ranges after Bernese periacetabular osteotomy? Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:1120–1127. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-016-5077-8
doi: 10.1007/S11999-016-5077-8
pubmed: 27646418
Sohatee MA, Ali M, Khanduja V, Malviya A (2020) Does hip preservation surgery prevent arthroplasty? Quantifying the rate of conversion to arthroplasty following hip preservation surgery. J Hip Preserv Surg 7:168–182. https://doi.org/10.1093/JHPS/HNAA022
doi: 10.1093/JHPS/HNAA022
pubmed: 33163202
pmcid: 7605779
Mechlenburg I, Nyengaard JR, Gelineck J et al (2012) Cyst volume in the acetabulum and femoral head decreases after periacetabular osteotomy. Hip Int 22:313–318. https://doi.org/10.5301/HIP.2012.9248
doi: 10.5301/HIP.2012.9248
pubmed: 22740278
Willey MC, Westermann RW, Glass N et al (2022) Risk factors for composite failure of hip dysplasia treated with periacetabular osteotomy: a minimum 10-year follow-up. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 30:E690–E702. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-21-00535
doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-21-00535
pubmed: 35171882
Peters CL, Erickson JA, Hines JL (2006) Early results of the Bernese periacetabular osteotomy: the learning curve at an academic medical center. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:1920–1926. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.00515
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00515
pubmed: 16951106
Wells J, Schoenecker P, Duncan S et al (2018) Intermediate-term hip survivorship and patient-reported outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy: the Washington University experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am 100:218–225. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.17.00337
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.17.00337
pubmed: 29406343
Novais EN, Carry PM, Kestel LA et al (2017) Does surgeon experience impact the risk of complications after Bernese periacetabular osteotomy? Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:1110–1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11999-016-5010-1
doi: 10.1007/S11999-016-5010-1
pubmed: 27495809
Thiagarajah S, Bingham JS, Grammatopoulos G, Witt J (2020) A minimally invasive periacetabular osteotomy technique: minimizing intraoperative risks. J Hip Preserv Surg 7:591–595. https://doi.org/10.1093/JHPS/HNAA040
doi: 10.1093/JHPS/HNAA040
pubmed: 33948215
pmcid: 8081413
Howie DW, Beck M, Costi K et al (2012) Mentoring in complex surgery: minimising the learning curve complications from peri-acetabular osteotomy. Int Orthop 36:921–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00264-011-1347-Y
doi: 10.1007/S00264-011-1347-Y
pubmed: 21898037
Chou DTS, Solomon LB, Costi K et al (2019) Structured-mentorship program for periacetabular osteotomy resulted in few complications for a low-volume pelvic surgeon. Clin Orthop Relat Res 477:1126–1134. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000571
doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000571
pubmed: 30461514