Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 5, Issue 6 | Pages 225 - 231
1 Jun 2016
Yeung M Kowalczuk M Simunovic N Ayeni OR

Objective. Hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip dysplasia is controversial in the orthopaedic community, as the outcome literature has been variable and inconclusive. We hypothesise that outcomes of hip arthroscopy may be diminished in the setting of hip dysplasia, but outcomes may be acceptable in milder or borderline cases of hip dysplasia. Methods. A systematic search was performed in duplicate for studies investigating the outcome of hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip dysplasia up to July 2015. Study parameters including sample size, definition of dysplasia, outcomes measures, and re-operation rates were obtained. Furthermore, the levels of evidence of studies were collected and quality assessment was performed. Results. The systematic review identified 18 studies investigating hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip dysplasia, with 889 included patients. Criteria used by the studies to diagnose hip dysplasia and borderline hip dysplasia included centre edge angle in 72% of studies but the range of angles were quite variable. Although 89% of studies reported improved post-operative outcome scores in the setting of hip dysplasia, revision rates were considerable (14.1%), with 9.6% requiring conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Conclusion. The available orthopaedic literature suggests that although improved outcomes are seen in hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip dysplasia, there is a high rate of re-operation and conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Furthermore, the criteria used to define hip dysplasia vary considerably among published studies. Cite this article: M. Yeung, M. Kowalczuk, N. Simunovic, O. R. Ayeni. Hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip dysplasia: A systematic review. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:225–231. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.56.2000533


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 3, Issue 1 | Pages 1 - 6
1 Jan 2014
Yamada K Mihara H Fujii H Hachiya M

Objectives. There are several reports clarifying successful results following open reduction using Ludloff’s medial approach for congenital (CDH) or developmental dislocation of the hip (DDH). This study aimed to reveal the long-term post-operative course until the period of hip-joint maturity after the conventional surgical treatments. Methods. A long-term follow-up beyond the age of hip-joint maturity was performed for 115 hips in 103 patients who underwent open reduction using Ludloff’s medial approach in our hospital. The mean age at surgery was 8.5 months (2 to 26) and the mean follow-up was 20.3 years (15 to 28). The radiological condition at full growth of the hip joint was evaluated by Severin’s classification. Results. All 115 hips successfully attained reduction after surgery; however, 74 hips (64.3%) required corrective surgery at a mean age of 2.6 years (one to six). According to Severin’s classification, 69 hips (60.0%) were classified as group I or II, which were considered to represent acceptable results. A total of 39 hips (33.9%) were group III and the remaining seven hips (6.1%) group IV. As to re-operation, 20 of 21 patients who underwent surgical reduction after 12 months of age required additional corrective surgeries during the growth period as the hip joint tended to subluxate gradually. Conclusion. Open reduction using Ludloff’s medial approach accomplished successful joint reduction for persistent CDH or DDH, but this surgical treatment was only appropriate before the ambulating stage. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:1–6


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 1, Issue 4 | Pages 80 - 87
24 Apr 2020
Passaplan C Gautier L Gautier E

Aims

Our retrospective analysis reports the outcome of patients operated for slipped capital femoral epiphysis using the modified Dunn procedure. Results, complications, and the need for revision surgery are compared with the recent literature.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 17 patients (18 hips) who underwent the modified Dunn procedure for the treatment of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Outcome measurement included standardized scores. Clinical assessment included ambulation, leg length discrepancy, and hip mobility. Radiographically, the quality of epiphyseal reduction was evaluated using the Southwick and Alpha-angles. Avascular necrosis, heterotopic ossifications, and osteoarthritis were documented at follow-up.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 7 | Pages 793 - 799
1 Jul 2019
Ugland TO Haugeberg G Svenningsen S Ugland SH Berg ØH Pripp AH Nordsletten L

Aims

The aim of this randomized trial was to compare the functional outcome of two different surgical approaches to the hip in patients with a femoral neck fracture treated with a hemiarthroplasty.

Patients and Methods

A total of 150 patients who were treated between February 2014 and July 2017 were included. Patients were allocated to undergo hemiarthroplasty using either an anterolateral or a direct lateral approach, and were followed for 12 months. The mean age of the patients was 81 years (69 to 90), and 109 were women (73%). Functional outcome measures, assessed by a physiotherapist blinded to allocation, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected postoperatively at three and 12 months.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 8 | Pages 506 - 513
1 Aug 2017
Sims AL Farrier AJ Reed MR Sheldon TA

Objectives

The objective of this study was to assess all evidence comparing the Thompson monoblock hemiarthroplasty with modular unipolar implants for patients requiring hemiarthroplasty of the hip with respect to mortality and complications.

Methods

A literature search was performed to identify all relevant literature. The population consisted of patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty of the hip for fracture. The intervention was hemiarthroplasty of the hip with a comparison between Thompson and modular unipolar prostheses.

Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, PROSPERO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

The study designs included were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), well designed case control studies and retrospective or prospective cohort studies. Studies available in any language, published at any time until September 2015 were considered. Studies were included if they contained mortality or complications.