Incidence of delayed union one year after peri-acetabular osteotomy based on computed tomography
- 104 Downloads
Pubic bone nonunion and delayed union are reported as post-operative complications after peri-acetabular osteotomy (PAO). However, few studies have determined the incidence of delayed union using computed tomography (CT) scans. This study aimed to determine the incidence of delayed union at one year after PAO using X-ray and CT scans.
We performed a retrospective review of 150 hips in 132 consecutive patients with acetabular dysplasia who underwent PAO between January 2012 and June 2016 and evaluated 107 hips for which pelvic CT scans taken at one year after PAO were available. Clinical evaluations included age at surgery, weight, body mass index (BMI) and history. Radiographic evaluations were to assess pubic, ischial and iliac delayed union at one year post-operatively.
Based on X-ray analysis, the incidence of delayed union in the pubic, ischial and iliac bones was 11.2% (12 hips), 5.6% (6 hips) and 0% (0 hips), respectively, and20.6% (22 hips), 8.4% (9 hips) and 0% (0 hips), respectively, based on CT scans.
The incidence of delayed union of the pubis and ischium at one year after PAO according to CT scans was higher than that based on X-ray imaging. CT scans are useful in patients with some symptoms at the osteotomy site.
Level of Evidence: Level III.
KeywordsPeri-acetabular osteotomy Nonunion Delayed union Computed tomography scans
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Ganz R, Klaue K, Vinh T, Mast JW (1988) A new periacetabular osteotomy for the treatment of hip dysplasias. Technique and preliminary results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 232:26–36Google Scholar
- 10.Novais EN, Heare T, Kestel L, Oliver P, Boucharel W, Koerner J, Strupp K (2017) (2017) Multimodal nerve monitoring during periacetabular osteotomy identifies surgical steps associated with risk of injury. Int Orthop 41(8):1543–1551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3394-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Matta JM, Stover MD, Siebenrock K (1999) Periacetabular osteotomy through the Smith-Petersen approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res 363:21–32Google Scholar
- 18.Xuyi W, Jianping P, Junfeng Z, Chao S, Yimin C, Xiaodong C (2016) (2016) Application of three-dimensional computerised tomography reconstruction and image processing technology in individual operation design of developmental dysplasia of the hip patients. Int Orthop 40(2):255–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2994-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Yasunaga Y, Ikuta Y, Kanazawa T, Hisatome T (2001) The state of the articular cartilage at the time of surgery as an indication for rotational acetabular osteotomy. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 83(B):1001–1004Google Scholar