Surgical Hip Dislocation in the Era of Hip Arthroscopy Demonstrates High Survivorship and Improvements in Patient-reported Outcomes for Complex Femoroacetabular Impingement.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, hip arthroscopy has become more commonly used in the treatment of patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) as well as those with many other intra-articular hip pathologies. As such, the indications for open surgical hip dislocation have narrowed to include complex intra-articular and extra-articular bony morphologies and revision hip preservation. Although surgical hip dislocation has been established as an effective approach, previous research using contemporary indications has been limited primarily to smaller cohorts with short-term follow-up. Furthermore, factors associated with reoperation, conversion arthroplasty, and not achieving clinical improvement remain ambiguous. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: At a minimum of 2 years of follow-up in patients treated for FAI with surgical hip dislocation, (1) how much did patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) improve, and what percentage of patients achieved the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS)? (2) What was the survivorship free from reoperation of the hip for any reason? (3) What was the survivorship free from conversion to arthroplasty (THA or hip resurfacing)? METHODS: Between February 2011 and April 2021, 211 patients were treated at one academic institution with surgical dislocation and osteoplasty of the femoral head-neck junction or greater trochanter for FAI. Of these, patients with concomitant diagnoses including Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease, slipped capital femoral epiphysis, osteochondritis dissecans, a benign tumor, or another neurologic or metabolic disorder were excluded. This yielded 74% (156 of 211) of patients as potentially eligible. A further 12% (18 of 156) of patients without postoperative PROMs were excluded, and another 13% (21 of 156) were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 2 years, leaving 75% (117) for analysis at a median of 4.9 years (range 2 to 12 years) in this retrospective study. A total of 88% of the patients were women (103 of 117), and 40% (47 patients) underwent the procedure as a revision. All patients underwent surgical hip dislocation. Intraoperatively, 66% (77 of 117) of patients demonstrated cam impingement, and the remainder had either pincer impingement or combined cam and pincer; 82% (96 of 117) had some component of extra-articular impingement. To answer our first research question, we obtained PROM scores for the modified Harris hip score (mHHS) and international hip outcome tool 12 (iHOT-12) before surgery and at the most-recent follow-up from our longitudinally maintained institutional database, and we determined the percentage of patients who achieved the MCID or PASS. To answer our second research question, we calculated Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from any reoperation on the hip at 5.8 years (mean follow-up) after the index procedure. To answer our third research question, we calculated the Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from conversion to arthroplasty at 5.8 years. Using univariate logistic regression analysis, factors associated with meeting these defined endpoints were identified. RESULTS: At a mean of 6 ± 3 years, the mHHS of patients treated with surgical hip dislocation for FAI who had not had previous surgery on the hip improved from 53 ± 15 to 85 ± 13 (mean difference 31 [95% confidence interval 27 to 36]; p < 0.01) and the mean iHOT-12 score improved from 25 ± 14 to 74 ± 24 (mean difference 49 [95% CI 42 to 56]; p < 0.01). At a mean of 5 ± 3 years, for patients with prior hip surgery, mHHS improved from 55 ± 13 to 79 ± 15 (mean difference 24 [95% CI 18 to 30]; p < 0.01) and iHOT-12 scores improved from 25 ± 16 to 66 ± 26 (mean difference 41 [95% CI 31 to 50]; p < 0.01). The proportion of patients who achieved the MCID for the mHHS was 87% (55 of 63) and 83% (33 of 40), while the proportion who achieved the PASS for the mHHS was 66% (46 of 70) and 51% (24 of 47) for primary and revision surgery, respectively. The proportion of patients who achieved the MCID for the iHOT-12 was 87% (53 of 61) and 83% (33 of 40), while the proportion who achieved the PASS for iHOT-12 was 68% (47 of 69) and 57% (26 of 46) for primary and revision surgery, respectively. Higher lateral center-edge angles (odds ratio 1.2 per 1° [95% CI 1.1 to 1.3]; p < 0.01), a lower acetabular version at 2:00 (OR 0.92 per 1° [95% CI 0.85 to 0.99]; p = 0.05), the absence of a labral tear (OR 0.21 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.79]; p = 0.02), a higher preoperative mHHS (OR 1.1 per 1 point [95% CI 1.02 to 1.2]; p < 0.01), and a higher preoperative iHOT-12 score (OR 1.1 per 1 point [95% CI 1.01 to 1.1]; p = 0.01) were associated with not achieving the MCID. In patients without a history of ipsilateral hip surgery, survivorship free from reoperation at 5.8 years after surgical hip dislocation was 90% (95% CI 82% to 98%). In the setting of prior ipsilateral hip surgery, survivorship free from reoperation at 5.8 years after surgical hip dislocation was 75% (95% CI 60% to 95%). No patients for whom surgical hip dislocation was their primary hip procedure underwent conversion to arthroplasty. Among the revision patient cohort, survivorship free from conversion to arthroplasty at 5.8 years after surgical hip dislocation was 97% (95% CI 91% to 100%). CONCLUSION: Surgical hip dislocation effectively improves hip pain and function with high survivorship (free of reoperation or conversion to arthroplasty) for complex intra-articular and extra-articular FAI that is deemed less suitable for arthroscopic treatment, but when the procedure is used in patients who have had prior hip surgery, they should be told that revision surgery is a realistic possibility. If insufficient acetabular coverage is anticipated, acetabular reorientation osteotomy should be considered. Future studies should evaluate long-term survivorship and PROMs in larger patient cohorts, as well as identify other factors associated with reoperation and conversion to arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Does Periacetabular Osteotomy Change Sagittal Spinopelvic Alignment?

BACKGROUND: There are few data on the impact of periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) on sagittal spinopelvic alignment. Prior studies have attempted to delineate the relationship by performing measurements on AP radiographs and using mathematical models to determine changes in postoperative pelvic tilt. This information is clinically significant to a surgeon when evaluating acetabular/pelvic position intraoperatively and understanding spinopelvic alignment changes postoperatively; therefore, radiographic changes from PAO should be described in more detail. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this study, we asked: (1) Does the performance of PAO result in consistent changes in spinopelvic alignment, as measured on EOS radiographs? (2) Does this differ for unilateral versus bilateral PAOs? (3) Does this differ in the setting of a mobile spine versus an immobile spine? (4) Does this differ based on preoperative pelvic tilt? METHODS: Mean preoperative and at least 1-year postoperative (15 ± 8 months from surgery, minimum 11 months, maximum 65 months) EOS hip-to-ankle standing and sitting radiographs for 55 patients in a prospectively collected registry who underwent PAO with a single surgeon from January 1, 2019, to January 11, 2022, were measured for pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, lumbar lordosis, lateral center-edge angle, L1 pelvic angle, and pubic symphysis to the sacroiliac index. Normality was assessed and paired sample t-tests (normally distributed data) or Wilcoxon signed rank tests (not normally distributed data) were utilized to assess if any measurements changed from preoperative to postoperative. Patients were then divided based on whether they had unilateral or bilateral dysplasia and unilateral or bilateral surgery, and these subgroups were analyzed the same way as the entire cohort. Two more subgroups were then formed based on lumbar mobility, defined as a change in sitting-to-standing lumbar lordosis less or greater than 1 SD from the population mean preoperatively, and the subgroups were analyzed the same way as the entire cohort. Finally, two additional subgroups were formed, preoperative standing pelvic tilt less than 10° and more than 20°, and analyzed the same as the entire cohort. RESULTS: For the entire cohort, the median (IQR) standing lateral-center edge angle increased 17°, from a median of 21° (10°) to a median of 38° (8° [95% confidence interval (CI) 16° to 20°; p < 0.001). The median sitting lateral center-edge angle increased 17°, from a median of 18° (8°) to a median of 35° (8° [95% CI 14° to 19°]; p < 0.001). Standing pelvic incidence increased from 50° ± 11° to 52° ± 12° (mean difference 2° [95% CI 1° to 3°]; p = 0.004), but there were no changes for other measured parameters. There were no changes in any of the spinopelvic parameters for patients with unilateral dysplasia receiving a unilateral PAO, but patients with bilateral dysplasia who underwent bilateral PAOs demonstrated an increase in pelvic incidence from 57° (14°) to 60° (16°) (95% CI 1° to 5°; p = 0.02) and a decrease in pubic symphysis to sacroiliac index from 84 mm (24 mm) to 77 mm (23 mm) (95% CI -7° to -2°; p = 0.007). Patients with mobile lumbar spines preoperatively did not exhibit any changes in sagittal spinopelvic alignment, but patients with immobile lumbar spines preoperatively experienced several changes after surgery. Patients with less than 10° of standing pelvic tilt demonstrated a median (IQR) 2° increase in pelvic incidence from median 43° (9°) to 45° (12° [95% CI 0.3° to 4°]; p = 0.03), but they did not experience any other changes in sagittal spinopelvic alignment parameters postoperatively. Patients with preoperative pelvic tilt more than 20° did not experience any change in sagittal spinopelvic parameters. CONCLUSION: PAO increases pelvic incidence, potentially because of anterior translation of the hip center. There were no changes in other spinopelvic parameters postoperatively except after bilateral PAO. Additionally, patients lacking spine mobility preoperatively, indicated by a minimal change in lumbar lordosis between standing and sitting positions, may experience several changes in spinopelvic alignment, including increased mobility of their spine after PAO. This may be because of decreased compensatory spine splinting after increasing acetabular coverage, but further research including patient-reported outcomes is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

The Optimal Age for Surgical Management of DDH Differs by Treatment Method.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus on the optimal age for specific surgical interventions for developmental dysplasia of the hip. We compared radiographic and clinical outcomes among patients who were treated with closed reduction (CR), open reduction (OR), and open reduction with concomitant pelvic osteotomy (ORP) for the treatment of a dislocated hip. We sought to identify the optimal age at treatment within each of these groups. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 256 hips (n=195 patients) who underwent CR (n=96), OR (n=116), or an ORP (n=44) as their index procedure at a single institution between January 1, 2004 and September 23, 2020. Radiographic outcomes included acetabular index, The International Hip Dysplasia Institute classification, and acetabular depth ratio. The incidence of further corrective surgery (FCS), defined as the need for an additional femoral and/or pelvic osteotomy before skeletal maturity, and the optimal age cutoffs for index surgery within each surgical group were determined. RESULTS: After adjusting for age and sex, the incidence of FCS was 13.8% in the CR group, 29.2% in the OR group, and 9.2% in the ORP group. Earlier surgery was protective against FCS in the CR and OR groups. In contrast, patients in the ORP group who were older at index procedure were less likely to undergo FCS. Optimal age at surgery was 9.9 months (CR), 11.5 months (OR), and 21.4 months (ORP). Compared with older patients, younger patients were associated with a larger average decrease in the acetabular index and a larger average increase in acetabular width during the first 5 years post surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Age at index surgical procedure was correlated with both clinical and radiographic outcomes. Age at index procedure did impact the risk of subsequent FCS, particularly in the CR and ORP groups. Based on our analysis, CR should be considered before 9.9 months of age and OR considered before 11.5 months of age to minimize the risk of FCS during childhood. This work highlights the importance of considering age-related heterogeneity in developmental dysplasia of the hip treatment outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Retroverting Periacetabular Osteotomy for Symptomatic Acetabular Anteversion.

BACKGROUND: Acetabular dysplasia has traditionally been defined using the lateral center edge angle and treated with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). However, the recently described Ottawa classification further quantifies dysplasia in 3-dimensional terms, categorizing Ottawa A as dysplasia due to isolated, excessive acetabular anteversion or anterior acetabular under-coverage. We sought to determine if patients who have Ottawa A dysplasia can expect similar outcomes when undergoing a PAO compared to a traditional dysplasia cohort. METHODS: Patients who had undergone PAO with Ottawa A hip dysplasia were selected and compared to a control group of patients who had lateral acetabular undercoverage. The modified Harris Hip Score and International Hip Outcome Tool-33 were collected preoperatively and at various follow-up points for a final follow-up average of 2.3 years (range, 0.9 to 6.2). RESULTS: The 17 patients (21 hips) who had Ottawa A dysplasia were compared to a control cohort of 69 patients (88 hips). Both groups saw significant improvements in modified Harris Hip Score and International Hip Outcome Tool-33 at final follow-up, P < .001. There were no differences between groups in any of the outcome measures or rates of achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID) or substantial clinical benefit. Rates of MCID ranged from 82.4 to 100%, and rates of achieving substantial clinical benefit ranged from 47.1 to 52.9%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing a PAO for Ottawa A hip dysplasia, a significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes can be expected with high rates of MCID achievement. This is not significantly different for patients undergoing PAO for more traditional dysplasia parameters.

Risk Factors for Suboptimal Outcome of FAI Surgery in the Adolescent Patient.

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment for adolescent patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is increasing. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes of FAI surgery in a multicenter cohort of adolescent patients and to identify predictors of suboptimal outcomes. METHODS: One hundred twenty-six adolescent hips (114 patients < 18 years of age) undergoing surgery for symptomatic FAI were studied from a larger multicenter cohort. The group included 74 (58.7%) female and 52 male hips (41.3%) with a mean age of 16.1 (range 11.3 to 17.8). Clinical outcomes included the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (5 domains), and University of California Los Angeles activity score. Failure was defined as revision surgery or clinical failure (inability to reach minimally clinical important differences or patient acceptable symptoms state for the mHHS). Statistical analysis was used to identify factors significantly associated with failure. RESULTS: There was clinically important improvement in all patient-reported outcomes for the overall group, but an 18.3% failure rate. This included a revision rate of 8.7%. Females were significantly more likely than males to be classified as a failure (25.7 vs. 7.7%, P =0.01), in part because of lower preoperative mHHS (59.1 vs. 67.0, P < 0.001). Mild cam deformity (alpha angle <55 degrees) was present in 42.5% of female hips compared with 17.3% male hips. Higher alpha angles were inversely correlated with failure. Alpha angles >63 have a failure rate of 8.3%, between 55 and 63 degrees, 12.0% failure rate, and <55 degrees (mild cam) failure rate of 37.5%. Patients who participated in athletics had a 10.3% failure rate compared with nonathletes at 25.0% ( P =0.03, RR (relative risk) 2.4). CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent patients undergoing surgical treatment for FAI generally demonstrate significant improvement. However, female sex, mild cam deformities, and lack of sports participation are independently associated with higher failure rates. These factors should be considered in surgical decision-making and during patient counseling. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective comparative study.

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.

Parent-Derived Health State Utilities for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip.

BACKGROUND: Developmental hip dysplasia (DDH) is a common condition associated with pain, disability and early hip osteoarthritis when untreated. Health utility scores have not previously been defined for a comprehensive set of DDH health states. The purpose of this study was to establish utility scores associated with DDH health states. METHODS: Patients treated for DDH using either Pavlik harness or abduction bracing and closed/open hip reduction between February 2016 and March 2023 were identified. Thirteen vignettes describing health states in the DDH life cycle were developed. Parents of patients were asked to score each state from 0 to 100 using the feeling thermometer. A score of "0" represents the worst state imaginable/death and a score of "100" represents perfect health. Utility scores were calculated and compared between parents of patients treated operatively and nonoperatively. RESULTS: Ninety parents of children with DDH (45 operative, 45 nonoperative) were enrolled. There were 82 (91.1%) female children (median age of 4.9 years at enrollment). Median utility scores ranged from 77.5 [interquartile range (IQR): 70.0 to 90.0] for Pavlik harness and 80.0 (IQR: 60.0 to 86.3) for abduction bracing to 40.0 (IQR: 20.0 to 60.0) for reduction/spica cast and 40.0 (IQR: 20.0 to 50.0) for end-stage hip arthritis. Utility scores were lower in the operative group for Pavlik harness (median 70.0 vs. 80.0, P<0.01), end-stage arthritis (30.0 vs. 40.0, P=0.04), and 1 year after total hip arthroplasty (85.0 vs. 90.0, P=0.03) health states compared with the nonoperative group. There were no differences in other scores. CONCLUSIONS: Thirteen health states related to the life cycle of DDH were collected. Nonoperative interventions for DDH were viewed by parents slightly more favorably than operative treatments or long-term sequelae of untreated DDH. Future studies can assess other potential treatment experiences for patients with DDH or use these scores to perform cost-effectiveness analysis of different screening techniques for DDH. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Dynamic ultrasound assessment of hip instability and anterior and posterior hip impingement.

OBJECTIVE: In this technical report, we describe our protocol for the dynamic sonographic evaluation of the hip and assess reliability of the ultrasound assessment of hip microinstability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our clinical experience with a standardized dynamic ultrasound of the hip performed in a series of 27 patients with imaging performed by an experienced musculoskeletal radiologist during physical examination by an orthopedic surgeon specializing in hip preservation is illustrated with clinical photographs and ultrasound images from volunteers and selected patients. Interrater reliability for the diagnosis of microinstability was calculated. RESULTS: Dynamic ultrasound technique and findings of hip instability, femoroacetabular impingement, and ischiofemoral impingement with corresponding clinical photos showing the necessary physical examination maneuvers are described. Interrater agreement for the diagnosis of microinstability was substantial (κ 0.606 [0.221-0.991]). CONCLUSION: At our institution, dynamic ultrasound of the hip during physical examination complements information gathered from static imaging by providing real-time correlation of symptoms with what is occurring anatomically.

Hip Morphology in Periacetabular Osteotomy (PAO) Patients Treated for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip (DDH) as Infants Compared With Those Without Infant Treatment.

BACKGROUND: A subset of patients successfully treated for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) as infants have symptomatic acetabular dysplasia at skeletal maturity leading to periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). The purpose of this study was to compare femoral and acetabular morphology in PAO patients with late acetabular dysplasia after previous treatment for DDH with PAO patients who do not have a history of DDH treatment. METHODS: A single surgeon's patients who underwent PAO between 2011 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients previously treated for infantile DDH with a Pavlik harness, abduction brace, closed reduction and spica casting, or open reduction and spica casting were included. Patients with previous bony hip surgery were excluded. Preoperative radiographic measurements of each hip were recorded including lateral center edge angle, anterior center edge angle, and Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof index. Computed tomography measurements included the coronal center edge angle, sagittal center edge angle, Tönnis angle, acetabular anteversion at 1, 2, and 3 o'clock, femoral neck-shaft angle, femoral version, and alpha angle. Control PAO cases without a history of DDH diagnosis or treatment were matched with the infantile DDH treatment group in a 2:1 ratio based on coronal center edge angle, age, and sex. RESULTS: There were 21 hips in 18 patients previously treated for infantile DDH (13 patients Pavlik harness, 3 abduction brace, 1 closed reduction, and 1 open reduction). The control PAO cohort was 42 hips in 42 patients who did not have previous DDH treatment. There was no statistically significant difference in any of the recorded measurements between patients previously treated for DDH and those without previous treatment including femoral version (P=0.494), anteversion at 1 o'clock (P=0.820), anteversion at 2 o'clock (P=0.584), anteversion at 3 o'clock (P=0.137), neck-shaft angle (P=0.612), lateral center edge angle (P=0.433), Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof index (P=0.144), and alpha angle (P=0.156). CONCLUSIONS: Femoral and acetabular morphology is similar between PAO patients with persistent symptomatic acetabular dysplasia following DDH treatment and patients presenting after skeletal maturity with acetabular dysplasia and no previous history of DDH treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-case-control, prognostic study.

Better Patient Care Through Physician Extenders and Advanced Practice Providers.

Physician extenders and advanced practice providers (APPs) are now common in most adult and pediatric orthopaedic clinics and practices. Their utilization, with physician leadership, can improve patient care, patient satisfaction, and physician satisfaction and work/life balance in addition to having financial benefits. Physician extenders can include scribes, certified athletic trainers, and registered nurses, while APPs include nurse practitioners and physician assistants/associates. Different pediatric orthopaedic practices or divisions within a department might benefit from different physician extenders or APPs based on particular skill sets and licensed abilities. This article will review each of the physician extender and APP health care professionals regarding their training, salaries, background, specific skill sets, and scope of practice. While other physician extenders such as medical assistants, cast technicians, and orthotists/prosthetists have important roles in day-to-day clinical care, they will not be reviewed in this article. In addition, medical trainees, including medical students, residents, fellows, and APP students, have a unique position within some academic clinics but will also not be reviewed in this article. With the many different local, state, and national regulations, a careful understanding of the physician extender and APP roles will help clinicians optimize their ability to improve patient care.

Adolescent hip dysplasia: what are the symptoms and how to diagnose it.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Adolescent and young adult hip dysplasia is a cause of hip pain which can lead to early hip osteoarthritis. This may result in early hip osteoarthrosis and possible total hip arthroplasty if dysplasia is not recognized and treated. Hip dysplasia in this population can be difficult to diagnose. It is important for primary care providers and pediatricians to recognize the symptoms, physical examination findings, and radiographic findings associated with adolescent hip dysplasia so that the patient can be referred to an orthopedist specializing in hip disorder. The current review includes the most up-to-date literature on the diagnosis of adolescent hip dysplasia. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have shown that most patients presenting with symptomatic hip dysplasia present with insidious onset hip pain localized to either the groin or lateral aspect of the hip in a C-shape distribution around the inguinal crease. Patients most commonly see several different providers and have pain for a long period prior to accurate diagnosis. There are myriad radiographic measurements of hip dysplasia, many of which are described below that are helpful in initial diagnosis. SUMMARY: Adolescent and young adult hip dysplasia can be a cause of early, progressive hip osteoarthritis. Hip dysplasia is a term that represents a spectrum of disorder due to abnormal formation of the hip joint, resulting in an acetabulum that does not sufficiently cover the femoral head. The ability to recognize symptoms, physical examination findings, and radiographic evidence of adolescent hip dysplasia is critical so that the patient can be referred to the appropriate provider and receive timely treatment prior to the onset of degenerative hip disease. This article will focus mainly on the diagnosis of adolescent hip dysplasia. The standard for treatment of acetabular dysplasia in skeletally mature patients is the periacetabular osteotomy; however, nonoperative management and occasionally arthroscopic surgery can also be considered in cases of symptomatic borderline dysplasia.

The modified Dunn procedure provides superior short-term outcomes in the treatment of the unstable slipped capital femoral epiphysis as compared to the inadvertent closed reduction and percutaneous pinning: a comparative clinical study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and radiographic correction after modified Dunn procedure versus inadvertent closed reduction and percutaneous pinning for the treatment of unstable slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). METHODS: We evaluated 45 patients with unstable SCFE treated using the modified Dunn procedure (n = 27) or percutaneous pinning (n = 18) during a minimum follow-up of one year. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Heyman and Herndon scores. The Southwick angle, alpha angle, and femoral head-neck offset were used to assess radiographic correction. The occurrence of complications and unplanned re-operations were recorded. RESULTS: At latest follow-up, 67% (18/27) in the modified Dunn procedure group and 28% (5/18) in the in situ pinning group had good or excellent Heyman and Herndon outcomes (p = 0.016). The morphology of the femoral head and neck was improved in the modified Dunn procedure group compared to percutaneous pinning (Southwick angle, alpha angles; femoral head-neck offset; p < 0.001). The proportion of osteonecrosis (26 vs. 28%; p > 0.999) and unplanned re-operations (26 vs. 33%; p = 0.894) was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Compared to inadvertent reduction and percutaneous pinning, the modified Dunn procedure provided better clinical and radiographic outcomes with similar proportion of osteonecrosis and unplanned re-operations following an unstable SCFE.

Local Infiltration Analgesia Compared With Epidural and Intravenous PCA After Surgical Hip Dislocation for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Open treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) through a surgical hip dislocation (SHD) approach has been reported to allow for improvement in pain and function. However, the approach require a trochanteric osteotomy and may be associated with high level of pain after surgery. Currently, there is no systematic approach for pain management after SHD for treatment of FAI. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was used to collect data from 121 subjects (12 to 21 y and below) who received periarticular local infiltration analgesia (LIA, n=20), epidural analgesia (n=72), or intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA, n=29) after SHD from January 2003 to June 2014. Verbal pain scores, opioid consumption, incidence of side effects/complications, and length of hospital stay (LOS) were recorded. All nonopioid medications with analgesic potential were included in the statistical models as potential confounding variables RESULTS:: Twelve hours after surgery, the odds of moderate/severe pain were higher in the PCA group (odds ratio, 20.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.7-243.8; P=0.0166] and epidural group (odds ratio, 5.2; 95% CI, 0.7-92.0; P=0.3218) compared with the LIA group. There was no difference in pain scores across all groups 1 hour (P=0.0675) or 24 hours (P=0.3473) postoperatively. Total opioid consumption in the LIA group was 59.8% (95% CI, 15.0%-81.0%; P=0.0175) lower than the total opioid consumption in the epidural group and 60.7% (95% CI, 17.3-81.3; P=0.0144) lower than the total opioid consumption in the PCA group. LOS was increased in the epidural (mean difference, 22.1; 95% CI, 6.8-37.4 h; P=0.0051) and PCA (mean difference, 16 h; 95% CI, 1-31.5 h; P=0.0367) groups relative to the LIA group. There was 0 (0%) complication in the LIA group compared with 11 (15.3%) in the epidural group. CONCLUSIONS: LIA was more effective at controlling pain 12 hours after surgery in comparison with PCA with similar pain control to epidural. LIA was associated with significantly lower need for opioids and shorter LOS compared with the PCA and epidural protocols. Periarticular infiltration should be considered for pain management after SHD for treatment of FAI in adolescents. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes After Submuscular Plating (SMP) of Pediatric Femoral Shaft Fractures.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate lower extremity strength and alignment among children who underwent submuscular plating (SMP). METHODS: Subjects who underwent SMP for a length unstable femoral fracture returned for isokinetic strength testing ≥2 years after surgery. Extensor and flexor strength deficits (percent difference) between the operative and nonoperative limbs were evaluated. Radiographic measurements of mechanical alignment [anatomic lateral distal femoral angle (aLDFA)] and qualitative measurements (The Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument, PODCI) were obtained from all subjects. The upper 97.5% confidence interval approach to establishing clinical equivalency was utilized to compare differences in strength and alignment between the operative and nonoperative limbs. An extensor strength deficit of >19% and an aLDFA discrepancy of >5 degrees were considered to be clinically significant. RESULTS: The average age at surgery of the 10 subjects included in the study was 8.7 years. The hardware was placed an average of 27.9 mm from the distal femoral physis and was removed 6.4 months postsurgery. Among all subjects, the median PODCI scores were ≥97 according to all subscales. There was no significant difference in extension torque between the operative versus nonoperative limbs at 60 degrees/s (P=0.5400), 120 degrees/s (P=0.4214), or 180 degrees/s (P=0.8166). More importantly, extension strength deficits between the operative and nonoperative limbs were not clinically significant at 60 degrees/s [upper 97.5% confidence interval (CI), 10.9%], 120 degrees/s (upper 97.5% CI, 11.0%), or 180 degrees/s (upper 97.5% CI, 10.7%). The difference in aLDFA between the operative and nonoperative limb was less than the predefined clinically significant threshold of 5 degrees for all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: SMP achieves satisfactory clinical and functional results. In this series, extensor strength deficits and/or lower extremity malalignment were not clinically meaningful. High patient satisfaction can be expected after implant removal. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-case series.

Femoroacetabular impingement in children and adolescents.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The present review discusses the etiology, clinical presentation, and management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in the pediatric population, including etiologic and diagnostic controversies, management options, and outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: New evidence demonstrates conflicting results regarding how and when primary FAI develops in relation to skeletal maturity. Recent studies also discuss the effects of sex, race, and sports on FAI development and radiographic considerations in the pediatric population. Recent literature demonstrates good to excellent outcomes in the operative management of FAI in children and adolescents. SUMMARY: FAI is a source of pediatric hip pain and can occur primarily or secondarily. It is characterized by anterior hip pain, made worse with flexion activities, decreased hip internal rotation, and a positive impingement sign. Pathologic values for radiographic measures of FAI are not clearly defined in the pediatric population. As FAI is a risk factor for osteoarthritis, early intervention in specific patients may be indicated. Hip arthroscopy, surgical hip dislocation, or combined mini-open and arthroscopic approaches are utilized, with good to excellent short, and mid-term functional results. Further study is required in the pediatric population to identify potential preventive strategies, to delineate the pathologic radiographic values of FAI, to define specific indications for operative management, and to examine long-term outcomes to determine optimal management.

Is Assessment of Femoral Head Perfusion During Modified Dunn for Unstable Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis an Accurate Indicator of Osteonecrosis?

BACKGROUND: The modified Dunn procedure, which is an open subcapital realignment through a surgical dislocation approach, has gained popularity for the treatment of unstable slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). Intraoperative monitoring of the femoral head perfusion has been recommended as a method of predicting osteonecrosis; however, the accuracy of this assessment has not been well documented. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked (1) whether intraoperative assessment of femoral head perfusion would help identify hips at risk of developing osteonecrosis; (2) whether one of the four methods of assessment of femoral head perfusion is more accurate (highest area under the curve) at identifying hips at risk of osteonecrosis; and (3) whether specific clinical features would be associated with osteonecrosis occurrence after a modified Dunn procedure for unstable SCFE. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2014, we performed 29 modified Dunn procedures for unstable SCFE (16 boys, 11 girls; median age, 13 years; range, 8-17 years); two were lost to followup before 1 year. During this period, six patients with unstable SCFE were treated by other procedures. All patients undergoing modified Dunn underwent assessment of epiphyseal perfusion by the presence of active bleeding and/or by intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. In the initial five patients perfusion was recorded once, either before dissection of the retinacular flap or after fixation by one of the two methods. In the remaining 22 patients (81%), perfusion was systematically assessed before dissection of the retinacular flap and after fixation by both methods. Minimum followup was 1 year (median, 2.5 years; range, 1-8 years) because osteonecrosis typically develops within the first year after surgery. Patients were assessed for osteonecrosis by the presence of femoral head collapse at radiographs obtained every 3 months during the first year after surgery. Seven (26%) of the 27 patients developed osteonecrosis. Measures of diagnostic accuracy including sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) were estimated. Multiple variable logistic regression analyses were used to test whether the test options were better than random chance (AUC > 0.50) at differentiating between patients who did versus did not develop osteonecrosis. Nonparametric methods were used to test for a difference in AUC across the four methods. A secondary analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with osteonecrosis. RESULTS: After adjusting for body mass index, which was found to be a confounding variable, assessment of femoral head perfusion with ICP monitoring before retinaculum dissection (adjusted AUC: 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.99; p = 0.006), femoral head perfusion with ICP monitoring after definitive fixation (adjusted AUC: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.0; p < 0.001), bleeding before retinaculum dissection (adjusted AUC: 0.77; 95% CI, 0.58-0.96; p = 0.006), and bleeding after definitive fixation (adjusted AUC: 0.81; 95% CI, 0.63-0.99; p = 0.001) were found to be helpful at identifying osteonecrosis. We were not able to identify a specific test that had performed best because there was no difference (p = 0.8226) in AUC across the four methods. With the numbers available, we were unable to identify clinical factors predictive of osteonecrosis in our cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Assessments of femoral head blood perfusion by ICP monitoring or by the presence of active bleeding in combination with the patient's body mass index are effective at differentiating between patients who do versus do not develop osteonecrosis after a modified Dunn procedure for unstable SCFE. Additional research is needed to determine whether information gained from assessment of femoral head perfusion during surgery should be used to guide targeted treatment recommendations that may reduce the development of femoral head deformity secondary to osteonecrosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Association of Epsilon-Aminocaproic Acid With Blood Loss and Risk of Transfusion After Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) reorients the acetabular cartilage through a complex series of pelvic osteotomies, which risks significant blood loss often necessitating blood transfusion. Therefore, it is important to identify effective strategies to manage blood loss and decrease morbidity after PAO. The purpose of this study was to determine the association of epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA), an antifibrinolytic agent, with blood loss from PAO. METHODS: Ninety-three patients out of 110 consecutive patients that underwent unilateral PAO for acetabular dysplasia met inclusion criteria. Fifty patients received EACA intraoperatively. Demographics, autologous blood predonation, anesthetic type, intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), cell-saver utilization, and transfusions were recorded. Total blood loss was calculated. Two-sample t-test and chi-square or Fisher's exact test were used as appropriate. The associations between EACA administration and calculated EBL, cell-saver utilization, intraoperative EBL, and maximum difference in postoperative hemoglobin were assessed via multiple regression, adjusting for confounders. Post hoc power analysis demonstrated sufficient power to detect a 250-mL difference in calculated EBL between groups. Alpha level was 0.05 for all tests. RESULTS: No demographic differences existed between groups. Mean blood loss and allogeneic transfusion rates were not statistically significant between groups (P = .093 and .170, respectively). There were no differences in cell-saver utilization, intraoperative EBL, and/or postoperative hemoglobin. There was a higher rate of autologous blood utilization in the group not receiving EACA because of a clinical practice change. CONCLUSIONS: EACA administration was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in blood loss or allogeneic transfusion in patients undergoing PAO.

What are the demographic and radiographic characteristics of patients with symptomatic extraarticular femoroacetabular impingement?

BACKGROUND: Extraarticular femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) can result in symptomatic hip pain, but preoperative demographic, radiographic, and physical examination findings have not been well characterized. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were to (1) define the demographic characteristics of patients with symptomatic extraarticular FAI; and (2) identify relevant radiographic and physical examination findings that are associated with intraoperative locations of extraarticular FAI. METHODS: For purposes of this study, we defined extraarticular FAI as abnormal contact between the extraarticular regions of the proximal femur (greater trochanter, lesser trochanter, extracapsular femoral neck) and the ilium or ischium. The diagnosis was suspected preoperatively, but it was confirmed at the time of surgery by direct visualization of extraarticular impingement after surgical hip dislocation. A prospective single-center hip preservation registry was used to retrospectively characterize patients presenting between October 2010 and November 2013 with symptomatic hip pain and intraoperative findings of extraarticular FAI (N = 75 patients, 86 hips). Detailed demographic data were recorded. Radiographs, CT, and MRI scans were reviewed for all patients by two of the authors (BFR, ELS). Outcome instruments including modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) were assessed preoperatively. A comparison group of all patients (N = 1690 patients, 1989 hips) undergoing surgery for intraarticular FAI over the study period were included for demographic comparisons. Cases with extraarticular FAI accounted for 4% (75 of 1765 patients) of our cohort over the study time period. RESULTS: Patients with extraarticular FAI were more likely to be younger (mean ± SD, 24 ± 7 years versus 30 ± 11 years; difference [95% confidence interval {CI}], -7 [-9 to -4]; p < 0.001), female (85% versus 49%; odds ratio [95% CI], 6 [3 to 12]; p < 0.001), to have undergone prior hip surgery (44% versus 10%; odds ratio [95% CI], 9 (6 to 15); p < 0.001), and have lower preoperative outcome scores after adjustment for age, sex, and revision status (mHHS 55 ± 15 versus 63 ± 15; adjusted difference [95% CI], -4 (-8 to -1); p = 0.017; HOS ADL 64 ± 19 versus 73 ± 18; adjusted difference [95% CI], -7 (-11 to -3); p = 0.002) than patients undergoing surgery for intraarticular FAI. Within the extraarticular FAI group, preoperative femoral version on CT was different among patients with anterior versus posterior extraarticular impingement (median [first quartile, third quartile], 8° [2, 18] versus 21° [20, 30], respectively; p = 0.005) and anterior versus complex extraarticular impingement (median [first quartile, third quartile], 8° [2, 18] versus 20° [10, 30], respectively; p = 0.007]. Preoperative external rotation in extension was increased in patients with anterior versus complex extraarticular FAI (median [first quartile, third quartile], 70° [55, 75] versus 40° [20, 60]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Extraarticular FAI is an uncommon source of impingement symptoms. We suspect the diagnosis often is missed, because many of these patients had prior hip surgery before the procedure that diagnosed the extraarticular impingement source. This diagnosis seems more common in younger, female patients. Radiographic and physical examination findings correspond to locations of intraoperative extraarticular impingement. Future studies will need to determine whether surgical treatment of extraarticular impingement pathology improves pain and function in this subset of patients.

Modified Dunn Procedure is Superior to In Situ Pinning for Short-term Clinical and Radiographic Improvement in Severe Stable SCFE.

BACKGROUND: In situ pinning is the conventional treatment for a stable slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). However, with a severe stable SCFE the residual deformity may lead to femoroacetabular impingement and articular cartilage damage. A modified Dunn subcapital realignment procedure has been developed to allow for correction at the level of the deformity while preserving the blood supply to the femoral head. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared children with severe stable SCFE treated with the modified Dunn procedure or in situ pinning in terms of (1) proximal femoral radiographic deformity; (2) Heyman and Herndon clinical outcome; (3) complication rate; and (4) number of reoperations performed after the initial procedure. METHODS: In this nonmatched retrospective study, 15 patients treated with the modified Dunn procedure (between 2007 and 2012) and 15 treated with in situ pinning (between 2001 and 2009) for severe but stable SCFE were followed for a mean of 2.5 years (range, 1-6 years). During the period in question, the decision regarding which procedure to use was based on the on-call surgeon's discretion; six surgeons performed in situ pinning and three surgeons performed the modified Dunn procedure. A total of 15 other patients were treated for the same diagnosis during the study period but were lost to followup before 1 year; of those, 12 were in the in situ pinning group. Radiographs were reviewed to measure the AP and lateral alpha angles, femoral head-neck offset, and Southwick angle preoperatively and at the latest clinical visit. The Heyman and Herndon clinical outcome, complications, and subsequent hip surgeries were recorded. RESULTS: At latest followup, the median AP alpha angle (52°, range 41°-59° versus 76°, interquartile range [IQR]: 68°-88°; p = 0.0017), median lateral alpha angle (44°, IQR: 40°-51° versus 87°, IQR: 74°-96°; p < 0.001), median head-neck offset (7 mm, IQR: 5-9 mm versus -5, IQR: -11 to -4 mm; p < 0.001), and median Southwick angle (16°, IQR: 6°-23° versus 58°, IQR: 47°-66°; p < 0.001) revealed better deformity correction with the modified Dunn procedure compared with in situ pinning. Nine patients had good or excellent results in the modified Dunn group compared with four of 15 in the in situ pinning group (p = 0.0343; odds ratio, 5.86; 95% CI, 1.13-40.43). With the numbers available, there were no differences in the numbers of complications in each group (five versus three complications in the in situ and modified Dunn groups, respectively; p = 0.66), but there were more reoperations in the in situ pinning group (three versus seven; p = 0.0230). CONCLUSIONS: The modified Dunn procedure results in better morphologic features of the femur, a higher rate of good and excellent Heyman and Herndon clinical outcome, a lower reoperation rate, and a similar occurrence of complications when compared with in situ pinning for treatment of severe stable SCFE. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Does previous pelvic osteotomy compromise the results of periacetabular osteotomy surgery?

BACKGROUND: As the Bernese periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) has grown in popularity, specific indications and the results in patients treated for those indications need to be evaluated. Currently, although many patients undergo PAO after having had prior pelvic osteotomy, there is limited information regarding the efficacy of the PAO in these patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to compare the (1) early pain, function, activity, and quality of life outcomes; (2) radiographic correction; and (3) major complications and failures between patients who underwent PAO after prior pelvic reconstruction versus those who had a PAO without prior surgery. METHODS: Between February 2008 and January 2012, 39 patients underwent PAO after prior pelvic osteotomy at one of 11 centers and were entered into a collaborative multicenter database. Of those, 34 (87%) were available for followup at a mean of 2.5 years (range 1-5 years). This group was compared with a matched group of 78 subjects, of whom 71 (91%) were available for followup at a similar interval. We compared clinical outcomes including UCLA activity score, SF-12, and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS); radiographic measures-anterior and lateral center-edge angle and acetabular inclination (AI)-and reoperations, major complications, and conversions to total hip arthroplasty. RESULTS: Although both groups reached clinical improvement in all categorical measures, the revision PAO group demonstrated greater pain (HOOS pain, study 74 versus 85, p = 0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 18.58 to -0.95) and less function (HOOS activities of daily living, study 80 versus 92, p = 0.002; 95% CI, 018.99-4.45) than the primary cohort. The revision cohort achieved a smaller average radiographic correction than in patients undergoing PAO without prior pelvic surgery. The mean correction in AI was less dramatic when directly comparing the revision and comparison groups (-12° to -17°, p < 0.001, SD 2.3-8.5). Although there was no difference in severe complications requiring further surgery, there were two conversions to hip arthroplasty (p = 0.109; 95% CI, 0.004-2.042) in the study group. CONCLUSIONS: PAO performed after prior pelvic surgery is associated with improvements in pain, function, radiographic correction, and early complication rates, but the improvements observed at short-term followup were smaller and more variable than those seen in patients who had not undergone prior pelvic surgery. We recommend considering PAO for residual deformities after prior osteotomy to improve function and quality life but warning patients of potential ceiling effects with a second periacetabular surgery.