The Otto Aufranc Award: Does Hip Arthroscopy at the Time of Periacetabular Osteotomy Improve the Clinical Outcome for the Treatment of Hip Dysplasia? A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: A periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is often sufficient to treat the symptoms and improve quality of life for symptomatic hip dysplasia. However, acetabular cartilage and labral pathologies are very commonly present, and there is a lack of evidence examining the benefits of adjunct arthroscopy to treat these. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of patients undergoing PAO with and without arthroscopy, with the primary end point being the International Hip Outcome Tool-33 at 1 year. METHODS: In a multicenter study, 203 patients who had symptomatic hip dysplasia were randomized: 97 patients undergoing an isolated PAO (mean age 27 years [range, 16 to 44]; mean body mass index of 25.1 [range, 18.3 to 37.2]; 86% women) and 91 patients undergoing PAO who had an arthroscopy (mean age 27 years [range, 16 to 49]; mean body mass index of 25.1 [17.5 to 25.1]; 90% women). RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 2.3 years (range, 1 to 5), all patients exhibited improvements in their functional score, with no significant differences between PAO plus arthroscopy versus PAO alone at 12 months postsurgery on all scores: preoperative International Hip Outcome Tool-33 score of 31.2 (standard deviation [SD] 16.0) versus 36.4 (SD 15.9), and 12 months postoperative score of 72.4 (SD 23.4) versus 73.7 (SD 22.6). The preoperative Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome pain score was 60.3 (SD 19.6) versus 66.1 (SD 20.0) and 12 months postoperative 88.2 (SD 15.8) versus 88.4 (SD 18.3). The mean preoperative physical health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System score was 42.5 (SD 8.0) versus 44.2 (SD 8.8) and 12 months postoperative 48.7 (SD 8.5) versus 52.0 (SD 10.6). There were 4 patients with PAO without arthroscopy who required an arthroscopy later to resolve persistent symptoms, and 1 patient from the PAO plus arthroscopy group required an additional arthroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial has failed to show any significant clinical benefit in performing hip arthroscopy at the time of the PAO at 1-year follow-up. Longer follow-up will be required to determine if hip arthroscopy provides added value to a PAO for symptomatic hip dysplasia.

Heterotopic Ossification Prophylaxis in Acetabular Fracture Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Heterotopic ossification (HO) following acetabular fracture surgery is relatively common. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature regarding HO rates following acetabular surgery and the effectiveness of the various prophylactic measures taken to prevent its occurrence. A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was performed using the search terms ("Acetabular" OR "Acetabulum") AND ("Heterotopic Ossification" OR "HO" OR "Ectopic Ossification"). Inclusion criteria included articles published in English reporting on HO in acetabular fracture surgery. Descriptive statistics were calculated with categorical data presented as frequency with percentages and continuous data as means. Standard weighted means were calculated for all parameters. Sixty-six articles were included in this study with a total of 5,028 patients. HO was identified in 1,511 (30%) of fractures. Indomethacin (27%) and radiation therapy (24%) demonstrated decreased rates of HO formation versus no prophylaxis (36%). In particular, rates of severe HO formation were substantially decreased with radiation therapy (3%) and indomethacin (7%) compared to no prophylaxis (18%). Indomethacin and radiation therapy both appear to decrease HO formation and severity without substantially increasing surgical morbidity. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(4):217-224, 2023).

Trends, demographics and reoperation rates of periacetabular osteotomy: an analysis from the PearlDiver database.

This study aims to examine the trends and demographics of periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) in the United States from 2016 to 2020 using a large healthcare database analysis. The PearlDiver database was queried for patients who underwent a PAO procedure starting with current procedural terminology (CPT) codes 27299, S2115 and 27146. Subsequently, the population was filtered for patients being ages 12-50, having an inpatient charge-type and those having a length of stay of at least 1 day. Patients with total hip arthroplasty were filtered out, and the resulting population was filtered by ICD-10 diagnosis codes. The providers of each patient were also examined to ensure their history of treating hip dysplasia. Student t and multiple regression analysis tests were used for statistical comparisons and trends analysis (P < 0.05 reported as significant). A total of 535 consecutive patients were analyzed over the study period. There was a higher incidence of PAO in females compared with males (P < 0.001) and a higher incidence of PAO in patients aged 15-19 years compared with older age groups (P = 0.017). Within the first year after the index PAO, 171 of the 535 patients, almost one-third (32%), received a reoperation. Of the 171 reoperations, 115 were deep removal of implant, 55 were a hip arthroscopy and 1 patient had a bone excision for heterotopic ossification. Similar studies should be carried out using other large health databases to confirm the external validity of these trends and rates across the United States.

Peri-Operative Management of Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Report of Current Practices from the Anchor Group, Supporting Literature, and Areas for Future Investigation.

Background: Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is a well-established surgical treatment for hip dysplasia, but very few studies report the impact of peri-operative management strategies on early pain and function. The purpose of this study is to describe peri-operative management variability among a group of experienced surgeons and review the literature supporting these practice patterns. Methods: We surveyed 16 surgeons that perform PAO to document various aspects of peri-operative management at four stages: pre-operative, intra-operative, post-operative in the hospital, and at discharge. Our goal was to report current surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, type of anesthesia, deep venous thrombosis and heterotopic ossification prophylaxis strategies, initiation of physical therapy, and use of continuous passive motion (CPM). We reviewed current literature to identify studies supporting these perioperative strategies and identify knowledge gaps that would benefit from further investigation. Results: Of the 16 surgeons surveyed, 75% had been in practice greater than 10 years and most had not altered their post-operative protocol for more than 3 years. 15/16 surgeons felt that length of stay could be reduced at their institution with improved peri-operative pain management. 6/16 were considering or had already implemented outpatient PAO as a part of their practice. We found significant variability in the pain medications provided at all peri-operative stages. 14/16 utilized general anesthesia, and many utilized epidural or peripheral nerve blocks. 6/16 surgeons utilized surgical field block (also referred to as periarticular block). These surgeons advocated that surgical field block was an effective intervention with no/minimal complication risk. There is very little literature critically evaluating efficacy of these perioperative management strategies for PAO. Conclusion: There is significant practice variability in peri-operative management of PAO surgery. We report various strategies utilized by a group of experienced surgeons and review supporting literature. There are significant knowledge gaps in best surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, surgical field blocks, and use of CPM that need further investigation. Level of Evidence: IV.

One Health assessment of persistent organic chemicals and PFAS for consumption of restored anadromous fish.

BACKGROUND: Restoration efforts have led to the return of anadromous fish, potential source of food for the Penobscot Indian Nation, to the previously dammed Penobscot River, Maine. OBJECTIVE: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Penobscot Indian Nation's Department of Natural Resources (PINDNR), and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), measured contaminants in six species of anadromous fish. Fish tissue concentrations were then used, along with exposure parameters, to evaluate potential human and aquatic-dependent wildlife risk. METHODS: PINDNR collected, filleted, froze, and shipped fish for analysis of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), dioxins/furans, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Contaminant levels were compared to reference doses (where possible) and wildlife values (WVs). RESULTS: Chemical concentrations ranged from 6.37 nanogram per gram (ng/g) wet weight (ww) in American Shad roe to 100 ng/g ww in Striped Bass for total PCBs; 0.851 ng/g ww in American Shad roe to 5.92 ng/g ww in large Rainbow Smelt for total PBDEs; and 0.037 ng/g ww in American Shad roe to 0.221 ng/g ww in Striped Bass for total dioxin/furans. PFAS concentrations ranged between 0.38 ng/g ww of PFBA in Alewife to 7.86 ng/g ww of PFUnA in Sea Lamprey. Dioxin/furans and PFOS levels indicated that there are potential human health risks. The WV for mink for total PCBs (72 ng/g) was exceeded in Striped Bass and the WV for Kestrel for PBDEs (8.7 ng/g) was exceeded in large Rainbow Smelt. Mammalian wildlife consuming Blueback Herring, Striped Bass, and Sea Lamprey may be at risk based on PFOS WVs from Canada. IMPACT: Anadromous fish returning to the Penobscot River potentially could represent the restoration of a major component of tribal traditional diet. However, information about contaminant levels in these fish is needed to guide the tribe about consumption safety. Analysis of select species of fish and risk calculations demonstrated the need for a protective approach to consumption for both humans and wildlife. This project demonstrates that wildlife can also be impacted by contamination of fish and their risks can be as great or greater than those of humans. A One Health approach addresses this discrepancy and will lead to a healthier ecosystem.