Periacetabular Osteotomy as a Salvage Procedure: Early Outcomes in Patients Treated for Iatrogenic Hip Instability

How to Best Identify Acetabular Retroversion on Radiographs: Thresholds to Guide Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Acetabular retroversion is associated with impingement and instability. An adequate interpretation of acetabular version and coverage on radiographs is essential to determine the optimal treatment strategy (periacetabular osteotomy vs hip arthroscopic surgery). The crossover sign (COS) has been associated with the presence of acetabular retroversion, and the anterior wall index (AWI) and posterior wall index (PWI) assess anteroposterior acetabular coverage. However, the radiographic appearance of the acetabulum is sensitive to anterior inferior iliac spine (AIIS) morphology and pelvic tilt (PT), which differs between the supine and standing positions.

PURPOSE

To (1) identify differences in the acetabular appearance between the supine and standing positions among patients presenting with hip pain; (2) determine factors (acetabular version, AIIS morphology, and spinopelvic characteristics) associated with the crossover ratio (COR), AWI, and PWI; and (3) define relevant clinical thresholds to guide management.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients who presented to a hip preservation surgical unit (n = 134) were included (mean age, 35 ± 8 years; 58% female; mean body mass index, 27 ± 6). All participants underwent supine and standing anteroposterior pelvic radiography to assess the COS, COR, AWI, and PWI as well as standing lateral radiography to determine standing PT. Computed tomography was used to measure supine PT, acetabular version, and AIIS morphology. Acetabular version was measured at 3 transverse levels, corresponding to the 1-, 2-, and 3-o'clock positions. The correlation between radiographic characteristics (COR, AWI, and PWI) and acetabular version, AIIS morphology, and PT was calculated using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to define thresholds for the COR, AWI, and PWI to identify retroversion (version thresholds: <10°, <5°, and <0°).

RESULTS

The COS was present in 55% of hips when supine and 30% when standing, with a mean difference in the COR of 12%. The supine COR (rho = -0.661) and AWI/PWI ratio (rho = -0.618) strongly correlated with acetabular version. The COS was more prevalent among patients with type 2 AIIS morphology (71%) than among those with type 1 AIIS morphology (43%) (P = .003). COR thresholds of 23% and 28% were able to identify acetabular version <5° (sensitivity = 81%; specificity = 80%) and <0° (sensitivity = 88%; specificity = 85%), respectively. An AWI/PWI ratio >0.6 was able to reliably identify acetabular version <0° (sensitivity = 83%; specificity = 84%). In the presence of a COR >30% and an AWI/PWI ratio >0.6, the specificity to detect retroversion was significantly increased (>90%).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of the COS was very common among patients with hip pain. False-positive results (high COR/normal version) may occur because of AIIS morphology/low PT. Relevant thresholds of COR >30% and AWI/PWI ratio >0.6 can help with diagnostic accuracy. In cases in which either the COR or AWI/PWI ratio is high, axial cross-sectional imaging can further help to avoid false-positive results.

Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip With Osseous Impingement as Distinct From Femoroacetabular Impingement and Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip

Background

Borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH) accompanied by cam deformity and subspinous impingement has been found to benefit from arthroscopic surgery. However, the research comparing BDDH combined with osseous impingement to femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) without borderline dysplasia remains limited.

Purpose/Hypothesis

To compare the clinical symptoms, intraoperative findings, and outcomes of hip arthroscopy in patients with BDDH and osseous impingement versus cam-type FAI. It was hypothesized that BDDH with osseous impingement could be classified as a distinct entity between FAI and developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Data were collected from patients 18 to 50 years old who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between September 2016 and October 2020. Patients were divided based on preoperative lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) into 2 groups: (1) BDDH group (LCEA 18°-25°; n = 67); and (2) cam-type FAI group without BDDH (FAI group; LCEA 25°-40° and alpha angle >55°; n = 145). Disparities in symptoms, preoperative examination, intraoperative findings and procedures, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores were compared.

Results

Follow-up was available for 61 (91.0%) patients in the BDDH group and 125 (86.2%) patients in the FAI group. The incidence of cam deformity in BDDH patients was 91.8%. The preoperative characteristics and intraoperative findings were similar between the groups; however, preoperative internal and external hip rotation, Tönnis angle, femoroepiphyseal acetabular roof index, labral size, capsule thickness, and percentage of ligamentum teres tear were significantly higher in the BDDH group than the FAI group, and the percentage of pain aggravating factor, cam deformity, and anterior inferior iliac spine types 2 and 3 were also significantly different between groups (P < .05 for all). The percentage of intraoperative minimal acetabuloplasty, subspinous decompression, labral repair, ligamentum teres debridement, and capsular closure was significantly higher in the BDDH group than the FAI group, while the percentage of femoroplasty was higher in the FAI group (P < .05). Pre- to postoperative improvement on PRO scores was seen in both groups.

Conclusion

Given the differences in etiology and surgical procedures between the 2 conditions, it is suggested that BDDH with osseous impingement be classified as an entity distinct from FAI and DDH (and separate from BDDH without impingement) while excluding joint instability.

Pain, function and quality of life are impaired in adults undergoing periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for hip dysplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip dysplasia is a common condition in active adults with hip pain that can lead to joint degeneration. Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is a common surgical treatment for hip dysplasia. The effect of this surgery on pain, function and quality of life (QOL) has not been systematically analysed.

PURPOSE

In adults with hip dysplasia: (1) evaluate differences in pain, function and QOL in those undergoing PAO and healthy controls; (2) evaluate pre- to post-PAO changes in pain, function and QOL; (3) evaluate differences in pain, function and QOL in those with mild versus severe dysplasia, undergoing PAO; and (4) evaluate differences in pain, function and QOL in those having primary PAO versus those with previous hip arthroscopy.

METHODS

A comprehensive, reproducible search strategy was performed on 5 different databases. We included studies that assessed pain, function and QOL in adults undergoing PAO for hip dysplasia, using hip-specific patient reported outcomes measures.

RESULTS

From 5017 titles and abstracts screened, 62 studies were included. Meta-analysis showed PAO patients had worse outcomes pre- and post-PAO compared to healthy participants. Specifically, pain (standardised mean difference [SMD] 95% confidence interval [CI]): -4.05; -4.78 to -3.32), function (-2.81; -3.89 to -1.74), and QOL (-4.10; -4.43 to -3.77) were significantly poorer preoperatively.Meta-analysis found patients experienced improvements following PAO. Pain improved from pre-surgery to 1-year (standardised paired difference [SPD] 1.35; 95% CI, 1.02-1.67) and 2 years postoperatively (1.35; 1.16-1.54). For function, the activities of daily living scores at 1 year (1.22; 1.09-1.35) and 2 years (1.06; 0.9-1.22) and QOL at 1 year (1.36; 1.22-1.5) and 2 years (1.3; 1.1-1.5) all improved. No difference was found between patients undergoing PAO with mild versus severe dysplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

Before undergoing PAO surgery, adults with hip dysplasia have worse levels of pain, function and QOL compared to healthy participants. These levels improve following PAO, but do not reach the same level as their healthy participants.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42020144748).

Hip microinstability and its association with femoroacetabular impingement: A scoping review

Introduction

Hip microinstability has become a recognized cause of non-arthritic hip pain and disability in young patients. However, its pathophysiology remains unclear. We want to (1) present an overview of the evidence of hip microinstability and of its association with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), (2) map out the type of evidence available, and (3) make recommendations for future research.

Methods

A deductive analysis and extraction method was used to extract information. In addition, diagnostic accuracy statistics were extracted or calculated.

Results

Of the 2,808 identified records, 123 were eligible for inclusion. Different definitions for microinstability exist. A standardized terminology and clear diagnostic criteria are lacking. FAI and microinstability may be associated and may aggravate each other. Conservative treatment strategies for FAI and microinstability are similar. The reported prevalence of microinstability in combination with FAI ranges from 21% to 42% in adults undergoing hip arthroscopy or magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) of the hip.

Conclusion

Hip microinstability and FAI may be associated, occur together, or exacerbate each other. To better address this topic, a standardized terminology for microinstability is essential. Achieving consensus on physical examination and diagnosis is also necessary. Initial efforts to establish uniform diagnostic criteria have been made, but further work is needed. Specifically, randomized controlled trials are required to evaluate the effectiveness of training programmes aimed at reducing symptoms in individuals with microinstability, with or without FAI. Such studies will enable clinicians to manage microinstability with greater confidence within this context.

Effect of Peritalar Subluxation Correction for Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity on Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Peritalar subluxation (PTS) is part of progressive collapsing foot deformity (PCFD). This study aimed to evaluate initial deformity correction and PTS optimization in PCFD patients with flexible hindfoot deformity undergoing hindfoot joint-sparing surgical procedures and its relationship with improvements in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at latest follow-up. We hypothesized that significant deformity/PTS correction would be observed postoperatively, positively correlating with improved PROMs.

METHODS

A prospective comparative study was performed with 26 flexible PCFD patients undergoing hindfoot joint-sparing reconstructive procedures, mean age 47.1 years (range, 18-77). We assessed weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) overall deformity (foot and ankle offset [FAO]) and PTS markers (distance and coverage maps) at 3 months, as well as PROMs at final follow-up. A multivariate regression model assessed the influence of initial deformity correction and PTS optimization in patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 19.9 months (6-39), and the average number of procedures performed was 4.8 (2-8). FAO improved from 9.4% (8.4-10.9) to 1.9% (1.1-3.6) postoperatively (P < .0001). Mean coverage improved by 69.6% (P = .012), 12.1% (P = .0343) and 5.2% (P = .0074) in, respectively, the anterior, middle, and posterior facets, whereas the sinus tarsi coverage decreased by an average 57.1% (P < .0001) postoperatively. Improvements in patient-reported outcomes were noted for all scores assessed (P < .03). The multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that improvement in both FAO and PTS measurements significantly influenced the assessed PROMs.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated significant improvements in the overall 3D deformity, PTS markers, and PROMs following hindfoot joint-sparing surgical treatment in patients with flexible PCFD. More importantly, initial 3D deformity correction and improvement in subtalar joint coverage and extraarticular impingement have been shown to influence PROMs significantly and positively. Addressing these variables should be considered as goals when treating PCFD.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective cohort study.

Lateral Center-edge Angle of 18° (Bone-Edge): Threshold for Hip Arthroscopy Treatment in Patients with Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip?

OBJECTIVE

Hip arthroscopy for the treatment of symptomatic borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH) has been controversial. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively analyze minimum 2-year outcomes of BDDH after arthroscopic surgery and explore the criteria and thresholds of the lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) in arthroscopic surgery for BDDH.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from patients aged 18-50 who underwent arthroscopic surgery for BDDH and had an LCEA 18-25° between September 2016 and June 2020. The consistency of interobserver and intraobserver measurements of bone-edge LCEA was analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups based on LCEA (18-20°and 20-25°) and the results of arthroscopy compared between groups. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores, consisting of the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the international hip outcome tool-12 (IHOT-12), the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom status (PASS) were calculated.

RESULTS

In 52 patients with ≥2-year follow-up, female patients accounted for 71.2% and the mean age was 30.8 ± 8.4 years (range: 18 to 49 years). There was a high level of agreement when measuring the bone-edge LCEA definition of BDDH (Kappa = 0.921). Interobserver repeatability (ICC = 0.909, 95%CI: 0.847-0.947) and intraobserver repeatability (ICC = 0.944, 95%CI: 0.905-0.968) were excellent for bone-edge LCEA measurements. In addition to LCEA and Tönnis angle, there were no significant differences in α angle, neck stem angle, femoral anteversion angle, medial joint space, Tönnis grade of osteoarthritis, acetabular retroversion (8 sign), Cam deformity and anterior inferior iliac spine (AIIS) morphology between the two groups (p > 0.05). Intraoperative findings and procedures showed no statistical difference between groups (p > 0.05). The mean follow-up time was 44.4 ± 11.0 months (range: 25 to 64 months). Postoperative VAS, mHHS and IHOT-12 scores in the LCEA 18-20° group and the LCEA 20-25° group were significantly improved compared with those before surgery, and there was no statistically significant difference in the percentage of MCID and PASS (mHHS and iHOT-12) between the groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients in the LCEA 18-20° group and the LCEA 20-25° group achieved favorable outcomes after arthroscopic surgery. LCEA 18° (bone-edge) should be the threshold for hip arthroscopic surgery in BDDH patients without obvious hip instability.

Periacetabular osteotomy after failed hip arthroscopy demonstrates improved outcomes in a heterogenous patient population: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To evaluate the literature on patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy after failed hip arthroscopy (PAO-FHA) for (1) patient demographics and hip morphology, (2) changes in preoperative to postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and (3) PROs in comparison to primary periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of Pubmed, CINAHL/Medline, and cochrane databases was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The search phrase was "(periacetabular osteotomy or PAO or rotational osteotomy) and (hip arthroscopy or arthroscopic)". The titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened for studies on PAO-FHA. Study quality was assessed, and relevant data were collected. A meta-analysis was not performed due to study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The search identified 7 studies, including 151 hips (148 patients, 93.9% female) undergoing PAO-FHA, out of an initial 593 studies, with three Level IV and four Level III studies. Mean time from hip arthroscopy to PAO ranged from 17.0 to 29.6 months. Heterogenous hip morphologies and radiologic findings prior to PAO were observed, though patients most frequently demonstrated moderate-to-severe dysplasia (mean or median lateral center edge angle < 20°) and minimal osteoarthritis (Tönnis grade 0 or 1). In all 5 studies that reported concomitant procedures with PAO, femoral and/or acetabular osteoplasty was performed via arthroscopy or arthrotomy. Following PAO-FHA, radiographic acetabular coverage and PROs improved in all 6 studies that reported postoperative outcomes. All four comparative studies of primary PAO vs. PAO-FHA included patients with mean or median LCEAs < 20°, reporting mixed outcomes for the optimal treatment approach.

CONCLUSION

PAO-FHA is reported in a heterogenous patient population that frequently includes hips with moderate-to-severe dysplasia and minimal osteoarthritis. Regardless of hip morphology or concomitant procedures, all studies that reported postoperative outcomes demonstrated improved PROs following PAO-FHA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Performance of Tönnis triple osteotomy in older children with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) assisted by a 3D printing navigation template

Background

The objective of this study is to investigate the preparation of a navigation template via a computer-aided design (CAD) and 3D printing (3DP) in order to improve the effectiveness of Tönnis triple osteotomy in older children with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).

Method

Thirty-eight older children who received Tönnis triple osteotomy were included in this study. Among them, 20 were categorized as the 3DP navigation template group (3DP group), and the remaining 18 were categorized as the conventional surgery group (CS group). Data, including preoperative and postoperative pelvic sharp angle (SA), lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), acetabular roof angle (ARA), acetabular head index (AHI), crossover sign (COS), ischial spine sign (ISS), operation time (OT), intraoperative blood loss (IBL), and number of radiation exposures (NORE) were recorded for both groups. In addition, the therapeutic effect was evaluated at the last follow-up, according to the McKay criteria and Severin’s criteria.

Results

In the 3DP and CS groups, the mean OT was 126.6 ± 17.6 min and 156.0 ± 18.6 min, respectively; the mean IBL was 115.0 ± 16.9 ml and 135.7 ± 26.5 ml, respectively; the NORE were 3.3 ± 0.8 times and 8.6 ± 1.3 times, respectively. There were significant differences in the OT, IBL, and NORE between the two groups (P = 0.03, 0.05, < 0.001, respectively). At the last follow-up, the 3DP and CS groups displayed SA of 41.8 ± 2.3° and 42.6 ± 3.1°, respectively; LCEA of 35.6 ± 4.2° and 37.1 ± 2.8°, respectively; ARA of 6.9 ± 1.8° and 9.8 ± 2.6°, respectively; and AHI of 86.6 ± 4.1% and 84.3 ± 2.8%, respectively; COS(+) of 5 hips and 4 hips, respectively; ISS(+) of 6 hips and 7 hips. We observed no statistical differences in the SA, LCEA, ARA, AHI, COS and ISS between the two groups (P = 0.918, 0.846, 0.643, 0.891, 0.841, 0.564, respectively). According to the McKay criteria, the 3DP group had 10 excellent, 6 good, and 4 general hips, whereas, the CS group had 12 excellent, 4 good, and 2 general hip. There was no statistical difference between the two groups (P = 0.698). In 3DP group the postoperative Severin’s grading included 13 hips in grade I, 4 in grade II, 3 in grade III. Alternately, in the CS group, the postoperative Severin’s grading included 11 hips in grade I, 5 in grade II, 2 in grade III. The Severin ‘s criteria also showed no statistical difference between the two groups (P = 0.945).

Conclusions

Base on our analysis, our CAD-3DP-fabricated navigation template assisted Tönnis triple osteotomy in older DDH children, it reduced operation time and number of radiation exposures. However, no significant differences in radiological assessment and functional outcomes were observed when an experienced surgeon performs the surgery. Therefore, Surgeons who have less experience in triple osteotomy profit more from the application of this technology.

[Recent research progress of hip-preserving treatment for adolescents and adults with developmental dysplasia of the hip]

Objective

To review the imaging evaluation, treatment progress, and controversy related to developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in adolescents and adults.

Methods

The domestic and abroad hot issues related to adolescents and adults with DDH in recent years, including new imaging techniques for assessing cartilage, controversies over the diagnosis and treatment of borderline DDH (BDDH), and the improvement and prospect of peracetabular osteotomy (PAO) were summarized and analyzed.

Results

DDH is one of the main factors leading to hip osteoarthritis. As the understanding of the pathological changes of DDH continues to deepen, the use of delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage can further evaluate the progress of osteoarthritis and predict the prognosis after hip preservation. There are still controversies about the diagnosis and treatment of BDDH. At the same time, PAO technology and concepts are still being improved.

Conclusion

Cartilage injury and bony structure determine the choice of surgical methods and postoperative prognosis of hip preservation surgery. The hip preservation of adolescent and adult DDH patients will move towards the goal of individualization and accuracy.

Hip Capsular Deficiency-A Cause of Post-Surgical Instability in the Revision Setting Following Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To characterize current concepts in capsular repair and hip instability, and examine findings from biomechanical and clinical studies on hip capsular management strategies as they pertain to hip stability, patient outcomes, and hip arthroscopy failure. Further, we discuss the clinical evaluation and treatment of capsular deficiency.

RECENT FINDINGS

There remains debate regarding the optimal capsular management strategies in hip arthroscopy, particularly concerning the necessity of routine capsular repair. A variety of capsulotomy techniques exist and may be used to access the hip joint. Additionally, a wide variety of techniques are employed to repair the hip capsule. Biomechanical evidence supports capsular closure restores hip joint stability to that of the intact, native state. Several clinical studies in both primary and revision hip arthroscopy settings have demonstrated improved pain and functional outcomes in patients who underwent capsular repair or capsular reconstruction. Studies have shown capsular repair may be especially important in patients with ligamentous laxity and hip dysplasia, and in competitive athletes. Post-surgical hip instability secondary to capsular insufficiency is increasingly recognized as a cause of hip arthroscopy failure. Capsular closure restores native biomechanical stability to the hip joint, and several clinical studies report improved pain and functional outcomes following capsular repair or capsular reconstruction in both the primary and revision hip arthroscopy settings. There remains much to learn regarding capsular hip instability as it relates to optimal capsular management surgical technique, intra-operative capsular management decision-making, clinical diagnosis, and related advanced imaging findings.