Cargando…

Tönnis Grade 1 dysplastic hips have improved patient-reported outcome scores when intraarticular pathology is treated during periacetabular osteotomy

It is unclear whether treatment of intraarticular pathology should be performed during periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) to improve outcomes. Therefore, we asked: (i) What are the clinical results of PAO in patients with and without intraarticular intervention? (ii) Is there a difference in reoperation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Panos, Joseph A, Gutierrez, Claudia N, Wyles, Cody C, Bingham, Joshua S, Mara, Kristin C, Trousdale, Robert T, Sierra, Rafael J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8994101/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35414950
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnab077
Descripción
Sumario:It is unclear whether treatment of intraarticular pathology should be performed during periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) to improve outcomes. Therefore, we asked: (i) What are the clinical results of PAO in patients with and without intraarticular intervention? (ii) Is there a difference in reoperations with and without intraarticular intervention? and (iii) Is there a difference in clinical results and reoperations depending on preoperative Tönnis Grade if intraarticular intervention is performed? Prospective evaluation of 161 PAO in 146 patients was performed. The cohort was 84.5% female, mean age was 26.7 ± 7.9 years and mean follow-up was 2.4 years; 112 hips had Grade 0 changes and 49 hips had Grade 1 changes. Patients were classified into three groups based on treatments during PAO: major (labral repair, femoral head–neck osteochondroplasty), minor (labral debridement, femoral/acetabular chondroplasty) or no intervention. A subset of eight patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was analyzed to determine whether the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was achieved. Major, minor and no intervention groups exceeded the MCID in 5, 8 and 8, of 8 PROMs (P ≥ 0.20), respectively; intraarticular interventions did not influence reoperation-free survival (P ≥ 0.35). By Tönnis Grade, PROMs exceeding MCID decreased in Grade 1 versus 0 receiving no intervention (P < 0.001) but did not decrease for either intervention (P ≥ 0.14); intraarticular interventions did not influence reoperation-free survival (P ≥ 0.38). Overall, intraarticular intervention was associated with excellent PROMs and reoperation-free survival. Although Grade 1 patients had fewer PROM which achieved MCID, intraarticular interventions attenuated this decrease, suggesting a therapeutic advantage of intraarticular procedures for more advanced pathology.