header advert
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_11 | Pages 4 - 4
7 Jun 2023
Verhaegen J Milligan K Zaltz I Stover M Sink E Belzile E Clohisy J Poitras S Beaule P
Full Access

The gold standard treatment of hip dysplasia is a peri-acetabular osteotomy (PAO). Labral tears are seen in the majority of patients presenting with hip dysplasia and diagnosed using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). The goal was to (1) evaluate utility/value of MRI in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy at time of PAO, and (2) determine whether MRI findings of labral pathology can predict outcome.

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at tertiary institutions, comparing patients with hip dysplasia treated with isolated PAO versus PAO with adjunct hip arthroscopy. This study was a subgroup analysis on 74 patients allocated to PAO and adjunct hip arthroscopy (age 26±8 years; 89.2% females). All patients underwent radiographic and MRI assessment using a 1.5-Tesla with or 3-Tesla MRI without arthrography to detect labral or cartilage pathology. Clinical outcome was assessed using international Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT).

74% of patients (55/74) were pre-operatively diagnosed with a labral tear on MRI. Among these, 41 underwent labral treatment (74%); whilst among those without a labral tear on MRI, 42% underwent labral treatment (8/19). MRI had a high sensitivity (84%), but a low specificity (56%) for labral pathology (p=0.053). There was no difference in pre-operative (31.3±16.0 vs. 37.3±14.9; p=0.123) and post-operative iHOT (77.7±22.2 vs. 75.2±23.5; p=0.676) between patients with and without labral pathology on MRI.

Value of MRI in the diagnostic work-up of a patient with hip dysplasia is limited. MRI had a high sensitivity (84%), but low specificity (44%) to identify labral pathology in patients with hip dysplasia. Consequently, standard clinical MRI had little value as a predictor of outcome with no differences in PROM scores between patients with and without a labral tear on MRI. Treatment of labral pathology in patients with hip dysplasia remains controversial. The results of this subgroup analysis of a prospective, multi-centre RCT do not show improved outcome among patients with dysplasia treated with labral repair.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_13 | Pages 62 - 62
1 Dec 2022
Milligan K Rakhra K Kreviazuk C Poitras S Wilkin G Zaltz I Belzile E Stover M Smit K Sink E Clohisy J Beaulé P
Full Access

It has been reported that 60-85% of patients who undergo PAO have concomitant intraarticular pathology that cannot be addressed with PAO alone. Currently, there are limited diagnostic tools to determine which patients would benefit from hip arthroscopy at the time of PAO to address intra-articular pathology. This study aims to see if preoperative PROMs scores measured by IHOT-33 scores have predictive value in whether intra-articular pathology is addressed during PAO + scope. The secondary aim is to see how often surgeons at high-volume hip preservation centers address intra-articular pathology if a scope is performed during the same anesthesia event.

A randomized, prospective Multicenter trial was performed on patients who underwent PAO and hip arthroscopy to treat hip dysplasia from 2019 to 2020. Preoperative PROMs and intraoperative findings and procedures were recorded and analyzed. A total of 75 patients, 84% Female, and 16% male, with an average age of 27 years old, were included in the study. Patients were randomized to have PAO alone 34 patients vs. PAO + arthroscopy 41 patients during the same anesthesia event. The procedures performed, including types of labral procedures and chondroplasty procedures, were recorded. Additionally, a two-sided student T-test was used to evaluate the difference in means of preoperative IHOT score among patients for whom a labral procedure was performed versus no labral procedure.

A total of 82% of patients had an intra-articular procedure performed at the time of hip arthroscopy. 68% of patients who had PAO + arthroscopy had a labral procedure performed. The most common labral procedure was a labral refixation which was performed in 78% of patients who had a labral procedure performed. Femoral head-neck junction chondroplasty was performed in 51% of patients who had an intra-articular procedure performed. The mean IHOT score was 29.3 in patients who had a labral procedure performed and 33.63 in those who did not have a labral procedure performed P- value=0.24.

Our findings demonstrate preoperative IHOT-33 scores were not predictive in determining whether intra-articular labral pathology was addressed at the time of surgery. Additionally, we found that if labral pathology was addressed, labral refixation was the most common repair performed. This study also provides valuable information on what procedures high-volume hip preservation centers are performing when performing PAO + arthroscopy.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 87-B, Issue SUPP_II | Pages 206 - 207
1 Apr 2005
Plant M Chadwick R Strachan R Murray MM Greenough CG Milligan K Carter E Puttick S
Full Access

Introduction: Referrals for Low Back Pain (LBP) are common and many patients appear to see more than one specialist. In one acute trust, a dedicated Spinal Assessment Clinic (SAC) run by nurse practitioners was developed.

Objective: To determine patterns of referral for LBP from primary to secondary care.

Method: All new referrals to the hospital for LBP in an index period June–November 1998 were included. Consultations for these patients in the preceding six months and the subsequent two years were studied.

Results: A total of 801 patients were referred in the audit period. The patients were seen in the SAC 75%, orthopaedics 5.5%, rheumatology 4.5%, neurosurgery 12% and the pain clinic 4%. Onward referrals made after the initial appointment from the SAC 4.9%, from orthopaedics 26.7%, from rheumatology 8.6%, from neurosurgery 33.7% and from the pain clinic 10.3%. Subsequent repeat referrals made by the GP occurred in 3.7%of patients initially seen in the SAC, 11.1% from orthopaedics, 2.9% from Rheumatology, 3.2% from Neurosurgery and 17.2% from the pain clinic. The average wait in days for a first appointment was SAC 42, orthopaedics 103, Rheumatology 82, Neurosurgery 78 and pain clinic 77.

Conclusion: The SAC offers a shorter wait for patients and an extremely low “churn” rate, implying high rates of satisfaction in patients and GP’s. The wait for other specialities is longer, and in orthopaedics and neurosurgery the re-referral rate is almost one third. Referral procedures to secondary care might need to be streamlined for more efficiency.