Ultrasound techniques for the detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) encompasses a broad spectrum of hip pathologies, including femoral or acetabular dysplasia, hip instability, or both. According to the medical literature, ultrasonography is the most reliable diagnostic method for DDH. Several techniques for the assessment of hips in newborns and infants, using ultrasonography, have been described. OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of the Graf technique and other diagnostic techniques for DDH. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of studies that analyzed ultrasound techniques for the diagnosis of DDH within an evidence-based health program of a federal university in São Paulo (SP), Brazil. METHODS: A systematic search of relevant literature was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and LILACS databases for articles published up to May 5, 2020, relating to studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of different ultrasound techniques for diagnosing DDH. The QUADAS 2 tool was used for methodological quality evaluation. RESULTS: All hips were analyzed using the Graf method as a reference standard. The Morin technique had the highest rate of sensitivity, at 81.12-89.47%. The Suzuki and Stress tests showed 100% specificity. The Harcke technique showed a sensibility of 18.21% and specificity of 99.32%. CONCLUSION: All the techniques demonstrated at least one rate (sensibility and specificity) lower than 90.00% when compared to the Graf method. The Morin technique, as evaluated in this systematic review, is recommended after the Graf method because it has the highest sensitivity, especially with the three-pattern classification of 89.47%. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Identifier: CRD42020189686 at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identifier: CRD42020189686).

Ultrasound techniques for the detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) encompasses a broad spectrum of hip pathologies, including femoral or acetabular dysplasia, hip instability, or both. According to the medical literature, ultrasonography is the most reliable diagnostic method for DDH. Several techniques for the assessment of hips in newborns and infants, using ultrasonography, have been described. OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of the Graf technique and other diagnostic techniques for DDH. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of studies that analyzed ultrasound techniques for the diagnosis of DDH within an evidence-based health program of a federal university in São Paulo (SP), Brazil. METHODS: A systematic search of relevant literature was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and LILACS databases for articles published up to May 5, 2020, relating to studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of different ultrasound techniques for diagnosing DDH. The QUADAS 2 tool was used for methodological quality evaluation. RESULTS: All hips were analyzed using the Graf method as a reference standard. The Morin technique had the highest rate of sensitivity, at 81.12-89.47%. The Suzuki and Stress tests showed 100% specificity. The Harcke technique showed a sensibility of 18.21% and specificity of 99.32%. CONCLUSION: All the techniques demonstrated at least one rate (sensibility and specificity) lower than 90.00% when compared to the Graf method. The Morin technique, as evaluated in this systematic review, is recommended after the Graf method because it has the highest sensitivity, especially with the three-pattern classification of 89.47%. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Identifier: CRD42020189686 at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identifier: CRD42020189686).

Measurement of Pubofemoral Distance in the Diagnosis of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: Sensitivity and Specificity.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of measurement of the pubofemoral distance (PFD) for the diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), using the Graf method as the reference standard. METHODS: This was a prospective diagnostic accuracy study evaluating 1980 hips in at-risk neonates. The PFD measurement and the Graf method were performed at the same opportunity, with the hips in the same position (slightly flexed, adducted, and medially rotated). RESULTS: In our sample, the prevalence of DDH, defined as Graf type IIb or higher, was 15.6%. The mean PFD for dysplastic hips was 3.5 mm (median, 3.3 mm), whereas it was 3.0 mm (median, 2.9 mm) for nondysplastic hips. In both groups, there was a significant overlap between the PFD measurements and the Graf classifications. The PFD cutoff with the largest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 3.0 mm, which was found to have a sensitivity and specificity of 63.6 and 62.2%, respectively, with positive and negative predictive values of 31.2 and 71.4%, respectively, for the diagnosis of DDH. CONCLUSION: Measurement of the PFD shows good overall accuracy for the diagnosis of DDH. However, given its low-positive predictive value, it should not be considered to be a replacement for the Graf method.

Prevalence of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip in a Maternity Hospital in São Paulo, Brazil.

Objective To evaluate the prevalence of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), that is, hips classified as Graf type-IIc or higher, among a sample of the population of newborns aged from 0 to 3 days of life, and to correlate the findings with the main risk factors described in the literature. Methods An observational, cross-sectional, prospective study on a sample of newborns at a Maternity Hospital School in the city of São Paulo, Brazil, to assess the prevalence of DDH diagnosed by the Graf method and verify its correlation with the risk factors. Results A total of 678 newborns underwent hip ultrasound (1,356 hips). The prevalence of DDH was of 5.46%. The logistic regression analysis showed odds ratios (ORs) with statistical significance for the following parameters: white ethnicity (OR = 2.561; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 1.07 to 6.11); multiparity (OR = 3.50; 95%CI: 1.62 to 7.38), female gender (OR = 4.95; 95%CI: 1.86 to 13.13); and breech presentation (OR = 2.03; 95%CI: 1,01 to 4.11). Conclusion The prevalence of DDH in the sample was of 5.45% using ultrasound as a diagnostic method. This result is different from that of studies that assessed prevalence exclusively through physical examination (Ortolani maneuver). The main risk factors associated with a higher risk of developing DDH were newborns of the female gender, with breech presentation, firstborns, and of white ethnicity.