Key result
Periacetabular osteotomy combined with arthrotomy or arthroscopy did not significantly improve reoperation rates compared to osteotomy alone in hip dysplasia with labral tears (11.6% vs 6.4%, P=0.51).
Why the study?
Does PAO alone improve functional outcomes compared to PAO with arthrotomy or arthroscopy in DDH patients with labral tears?
Cohort (n=107)
Does PAO alone improve functional outcomes compared to PAO with arthrotomy or arthroscopy in DDH patients with labral tears?
Absolute Event Rate: 11.6% vs 6.4%
p-value: p=0.51
PAO alone yields comparable functional outcomes to PAO with concomitant arthrotomy or arthroscopy in DDH patients with labral tears, with a lower overall complication rate.
Questions routine addition of labral procedures to PAO; leaves open optimal management pending higher-level evidence.
Patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) who undergo periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) often have labral tears. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare PAO alone with PAO combined with arthrotomy or arthroscopy in DDH patients who had a full-thickness labral tear on magnetic resonance imaging. In total, 47 hips in the PAO group (PAO) were compared with 60 hips in the PAO with concomitant arthrotomy or arthroscopy (PAO-A) with respect to Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), clinical and radiographic outcomes at a median of 29 months. Reoperation rate and complications were compared between two groups of treatment. The PAO group was younger than the PAO-A group (25.2 ± 9.7 versus 31.3 ± 8.3). The PAO group was more likely to have worse dysplasia: lateral center edge angle (7.6°±9.63° versus 10.8°±6.85°) and anterior center edge angle (4°±12.92° versus 10.8°±9.92°). The PAO group had a higher preoperative mHHS (65.2 ± 15.3 versus 57.8 ± 14.8) and HOOS (66.3 ± 17.5 versus 55.8 ± 20.1). There were no significant differences in final functional outcome scores across treatment groups: mHHS (PAO; 86.8 ± 12.4 versus PAO-A, 83.3 ± 17.2), HOOS (86.5 ± 13.3 versus 82.5 ± 16.8) and VAS (2.5 ± 2.8 versus 2.5 ± 3.1). There was no difference in reoperation rate between two groups (6.4% versus 11.6%, P = 0.51). The overall complication rate was lower in the PAO group (26% versus 68%), but major complications were comparable. On the basis of our data, we were not able to conclusively demonstrate a clear benefit for the routine treatment of all labral tears; however, arthrotomy or arthroscopy may play a role in some conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thanacharoenpanich et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Developmental dysplasia of the hip with full-thickness labral tears (n=107). Periacetabular osteotomy combined with arthrotomy or arthroscopy vs. Periacetabular osteotomy alone was evaluated on Reoperation rate (p=0.51). Periacetabular osteotomy combined with arthrotomy or arthroscopy did not significantly improve reoperation rates compared to osteotomy alone in hip dysplasia with labral tears (11.6% vs 6.4%, P=0.51).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: