Cargando…

PERIACETABULAR OSTEOTOMY IN ACTIVE DUTY U.S. MILITARY PERSONNEL: A SINGLE CENTER’S EXPERIENCE WITH A MINIMUM OF TWO YEARS FOLLOW-UP

BACKGROUND: The primary focus of periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) literature has been survivorship until hip arthroplasty. This endpoint overlooks its impact on young, active patients. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: This study sought to assess the impact of the PAO on the careers of active duty members of the Un...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Murtha, Andrew S., Schmitz, Matthew R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7218947/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120S00143
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The primary focus of periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) literature has been survivorship until hip arthroplasty. This endpoint overlooks its impact on young, active patients. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: This study sought to assess the impact of the PAO on the careers of active duty members of the United States Armed Forces. METHODS: A retrospective review identified 38 patients who underwent PAO performed by a single surgeon at an academic, military medical center from January 2014 through April 2017. Twenty-one of the patients were active duty United States military service members (16 female, 5 male) and had a minimum 28 months of post-operative follow-up at the time of review. Preoperative and postoperative duty restrictions were noted and referrals to the U.S Army and U.S. Air Force Medical Evaluation Boards (MEB) were queried. RESULTS: The average age at surgery was 25.6 years (range, 19-40y). Preoperatively, sixteen patients (94.1%) were on duty restrictions, one had been referred to the MEB, and records were not available on three patients who separated from the military prior to review. Average follow-up was 3.4 years (range, 2.3 – 5.4y). Among the patients without a preoperative MEB referral, 85.0% remained on active duty (n = 12) or completed their military service commitment (n=5). Of the fourteen patients with temporary duty restrictions preoperatively, 35.7% (n=5) were relieved of their restrictions and returned to full duty and 50% (n=7) were retained on active service with permanent duty restrictions. Such permanent duty restrictions typically consisted of modifications to the aerobic component of the semiannual military fitness testing. Six patients (28.6%) were referred to the MEB including one who was referred prior to PAO. Of these patients, two were deemed fit to retain on active service with permanent duty restrictions, two were medically separated for non-hip conditions, and two were medically separated for a hip condition. The average Veteran Affairs (VA) disability score related to hip pathology in patients referred to MEB was 16% (range 0-40%). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to look at the PAO in active duty military service members. In patients with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia, PAO may provide an opportunity to relieve preoperative duty restrictions and allow for continued military service. Further study with the inclusion of patient reported outcomes are necessary assess the impact of the procedure in this active patient population.