Femoral anteversion does not predict redislocation in children with hip dysplasia treated by closed reduction
- 127 Downloads
Increased femoral anteversion can be associated with hip instability, redislocation after closed reduction, and subsequent early degenerative arthritis.
Our study compared proximal femoral anteversion of affected and unaffected sides of patients with unilateral developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) on two-dimensional computed tomography. The primary aim was to evaluate whether femoral anteversion at the time of treatment affected the outcome of patients with unilateral DDH treated by closed reduction.
A retrospective review of 89 patients (82 females; 53 left; mean age: 26.6 months) with unilateral DDH was performed. Anteversion angle (AA) of the femur and acetabular index (AI) of both affected (AAa; AIa) and unaffected (AAu; AIu) hips were measured on two-dimensional CT scan performed no more than seven days prior to the index surgical procedure.
Among the 89 patients, 50 underwent closed reduction (56.2%), 38 underwent open reduction with or without pelvic osteotomy (42.7%), and one patient refused treatment (1.1%). Overall, the mean AAa was 28.1° ± 10.2° (range: 6.3°–54°) and mean AAu was 25.2° ± 9.9° (range: 1.9°–52.5°) (t = 3.2, p = 0.002). Tönnis type 2 hips did not show any statistically significant difference between AAa and AAu (p = 0.386), while Tönnis types 3 and 4 hips had significantly higher AAa than did AAu (t = 3.7, p = 0.001). There were significant correlations between age and AAa (coefficient = 0.4; p < 0.001) and AAu (coefficient = 0.304; p = 0.004). Correlation analysis showed that AIa did not improve with age in any Tönnis group (r: − 0.24, p = 0.823; F = 0.039, p = 0.962).
AAa, AIa, AAD, AID, and Tönnis grade distribution were similar in patients with good (no redislocation) and poor outcomes (redislocation) (p > 0.05).
In patients with unilateral DDH, anteversion angle (AA) was found to be significantly different between affected and unaffected sides. However, the difference had very limited or no clinical significance, as redislocation/sub-luxation was not influenced by AA values.
KeywordsDDH Unilateral Femoral anteversion Acetabular index Closed reduction
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
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.
No patients were involved. This is a retrospective study of patient’s data, and an IRB approval was obtained.
- 6.Duffy CM, Taylor FN, Coleman L, Graham HK, Nattrass GR (2002) Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of surgical management in developmental dysplasia of the hip in childhood. J Pediatr Orthop 22(1):92–100Google Scholar
- 7.Hernandez RJ, Poznanski AK (1985) CT evaluation of pediatric hip disorders. Orthop Clin North Am 16(3):513–541Google Scholar
- 12.Yong B, Li Y, Li J, Andreacchio A, Pavone V, Pereia B et al (2018) Post-operative radiograph assessment of children undergoing closed reduction and spica cast immobilization for developmental dysplasia of the hip: does experience matter? Int Orthop. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4038-0
- 15.Mootha AK, Saini R, Dhillon MS, Aggarwal S, Kumar V, Tripathy SK (2010) MRI evaluation of femoral and acetabular anteversion in developmental dysplasia of the hip. A study in an early walking age group. Acta Orthop Belg 76(2):174–180Google Scholar
- 19.Tonnis D (1985) Indications and time planning for operative interventions in hip dysplasia in child and adulthood. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 123(4):458–461Google Scholar