Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 12 | Pages 964 - 969
19 Dec 2023
Berwin JT Duffy SDX Gargan MF Barnes JR

Aims

We assessed the long-term outcomes of a large cohort of patients who have undergone a periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), and sought to validate a patient satisfaction questionnaire for use in a PAO cohort.

Methods

All patients who had undergone a PAO from July 1998 to February 2013 were surveyed, with several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and radiological measurements of preoperative acetabular dysplasia and postoperative correction also recorded. Patients were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with their operation in achieving pain relief, restoration of activities of daily living, ability to perform recreational activity, and their overall level of satisfaction with the procedure.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 6 | Pages 485 - 494
13 Jun 2022
Jaubert M Le Baron M Jacquet C Couvreur A Fabre-Aubrespy M Flecher X Ollivier M Argenson J

Aims

Two-stage exchange revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed in case of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been considered for many years as being the gold standard for the treatment of chronic infection. However, over the past decade, there have been concerns about its safety and its effectiveness. The purposes of our study were to investigate our practice, collecting the overall spacer complications, and then to analyze their risk factors.

Methods

We retrospectively included 125 patients with chronic hip PJI who underwent a staged THA revision performed between January 2013 and December 2019. All spacer complications were systematically collected, and risk factors were analyzed. Statistical evaluations were performed using the Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher's exact test.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 9 | Pages 757 - 764
1 Sep 2021
Verhaegen J Salih S Thiagarajah S Grammatopoulos G Witt JD

Aims

Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is an established treatment for acetabular dysplasia. It has also been proposed as a treatment for patients with acetabular retroversion. By reviewing a large cohort, we aimed to test whether outcome is equivalent for both types of morphology and identify factors that influenced outcome.

Methods

A single-centre, retrospective cohort study was performed on patients with acetabular retroversion treated with PAO (n = 62 hips). Acetabular retroversion was diagnosed clinically and radiologically (presence of a crossover sign, posterior wall sign, lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) between 20° and 35°). Outcomes were compared with a control group of patients undergoing PAO for dysplasia (LCEA < 20°; n = 86 hips). Femoral version was recorded. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, and reoperation rates were measured.