98%
921
2 minutes
20
Introduction: The evidence for periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) when used in the management of acetabular retroversion remain limited. The review aims to answer the following questions: (1) What are the indications for an anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion? (2) When are other concomitant procedures required when performing anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion? (3) To what extent is an anteverting PAO able to correct acetabular retroversion? (4) What are the clinical outcomes for an anteverting PAO when used in acetabular retroversion? (5) What is the estimated survival for anteverting PAO when used in the treatment of acetabular retroversion, before other procedures need to be performed? (6) What are the complications and the complication rates when an anteverting PAO is performed? (7) How do the outcomes of an anteverting PAO compare to other surgical procedures used in the management of acetabular retroversion?
Material And Methods: The systematic review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. The search was conducted using PubMed Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from inception through 1 May 2020. The keywords used were "periacetabular osteotomy". All studies that reported the outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy for acetabular retroversion were included. Each study's data was then retrieved individually. The study design, surgical technique, indications, outcomes and complications of each study were analysed.
Results: Seven studies with 225 hips were included. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for a positive crossover sign and posterior wall sign preoperatively as compared to postoperatively were 456.31 (95% CI: 99.57 to 2091.28) and 53.45 (95% CI: 23.05 to 123.93) respectively. The pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) for studies with their mean preoperative LCEA and AI in the dysplastic range were 12.61 (95% CI: 6.54 to 18.68) and-15.0 (95% CI: -19.40 to -11.80) respectively, while the pooled WMD for studies with their mean preoperative LCEA and AI in the normal range were 3.43 (95% CI: 1.08 to 5.77) and -3.56 (95% CI: -5.29 to -1.83) respectively. Other indicators for acetabular retroversion correction, hip dysplasia correction, functional outcomes and range of motion were also significantly improved and sustained up till 11 years postoperatively. Only 7.1% of the hips required subsequent surgical procedures for impingement symptoms or progression of osteoarthritis, and the mean estimate for survival time across the studies was 123.90 months (95% CI: 119.94 to 127.86). The complication rates for low-grade complication were 31.6% while the rate for high-grade complications was 12.0%.
Discussion: Anteverting PAO is indicated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion, and when performed, leads to good deformity correction for both acetabular retroversion and hip dysplasia, positive improvement in clinical outcomes sustainable till 11 years postoperatively and a mean estimated survival time of more than 10 years.
Level Of Evidence: IV; Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2021.103078 | DOI Listing |
Bone Joint J
April 2024
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Annastift Hospital, Hanover Medical School, Hanover, Germany.
Aims: Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is widely recognized as a demanding surgical procedure for acetabular reorientation. Reports about the learning curve have primarily focused on complication rates during the initial learning phase. Therefore, our aim was to assess the PAO learning curve from an analytical perspective by determining the number of PAOs required for the duration of surgery to plateau and the accuracy to improve.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Hip Preserv Surg
January 2021
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is effective in the management of developmental dysplasia of the hip and femoroacetabular impingement secondary to acetabular retroversion. During anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion, the need for both labral treatment and femoral head-neck junction osteochondroplasty remains equivocal. Accordingly, this study evaluated patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and reoperation rates after anteverting PAO with or without intraarticular intervention.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRadiography (Lond)
May 2022
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark; Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Denmark; University of Copenhagen, Depart
Introduction: The prevalence of acetabular retroversion is sparsely investigated. It may be associated with increased anterior pelvic tilt. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether patients with symptomatic and radiographically verified acetabular retroversion demonstrated increased anterior pelvic tilt compared to a control group, and furthermore to evaluate the prevalence of acetabular retroversion in the general population.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBone Jt Open
October 2021
Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Inselspital Bern, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Aims: The effect of pelvic tilt (PT) and sagittal balance in hips with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with acetabular retroversion (AR) is controversial. It is unclear if patients with AR have a rotational abnormality of the iliac wing. Therefore, we asked: are parameters for sagittal balance, and is rotation of the iliac wing, different in patients with AR compared to a control group?; and is there a correlation between iliac rotation and acetabular version?
Methods: A retrospective, review board-approved, controlled study was performed including 120 hips in 86 consecutive patients with symptomatic FAI or hip dysplasia.
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res
December 2021
National University Hospital, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Singapore 119228, Singapore.
Introduction: The evidence for periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) when used in the management of acetabular retroversion remain limited. The review aims to answer the following questions: (1) What are the indications for an anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion? (2) When are other concomitant procedures required when performing anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion? (3) To what extent is an anteverting PAO able to correct acetabular retroversion? (4) What are the clinical outcomes for an anteverting PAO when used in acetabular retroversion? (5) What is the estimated survival for anteverting PAO when used in the treatment of acetabular retroversion, before other procedures need to be performed? (6) What are the complications and the complication rates when an anteverting PAO is performed? (7) How do the outcomes of an anteverting PAO compare to other surgical procedures used in the management of acetabular retroversion?
Material And Methods: The systematic review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. The search was conducted using PubMed Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from inception through 1 May 2020.