Our understanding of pre-arthritic hip disease has evolved tremendously but challenges remain in categorizing diagnosis, which ultimately impacts choice of treatments and clinical outcomes. This study aims to report patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) comparing four different condition groups within hip preservation surgery by a group of fellowship-trained surgeons. From 2018 to 2021, 380 patients underwent hip preservation surgery at our center and were classified into five condition groups: Arthroscopy (75.5%) was the most common procedure followed by peri-acetabular osteotomy (PAO) (22.4%) and surgical dislocation (2.1%). Re-operation rate were respectively 18.3% (15), 5.8% (10), 4.9% (5), 30% (6) and 0%. There were 36 re-operations in the cohort, 14 (39%) for unintended consequences of initial surgery, 10 (28%) for mal-correction leading to a repeat operation, 8 (22%) progression of arthritis, and 4 (11%) for incorrect initial diagnosis/intervention. Most common re-operations were hardware removal 31% (7 PAO, 3 surgical hip dislocation and 1 femoral de-rotational osteotomy), arthroscopy 31% (11) and arthroplasty 28% (10). All groups had significant improvements in their IHOT-12 as well as PROMIS physical and numerical pain scales, except those with failed hip preservation. Dysplasia group showed a slower recovery. Overall, this study demonstrated a clear relation between the condition groups, their respective intervention and the significant improvements in PROMs with isolated labral pathology being a valid diagnosis. Establishing tertiary referral centers for hip preservation and longer follow-up is needed to monitor the overall survivorship of these various procedures.
The aim of the current study was to assess the reliability of the Ottawa classification for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia. In all, 134 consecutive hips that underwent periacetabular osteotomy were categorized using a validated software (Hip2Norm) into four categories of normal, lateral/global, anterior, or posterior. A total of 74 cases were selected for reliability analysis, and these included 44 dysplastic and 30 normal hips. A group of six blinded fellowship-trained raters, provided with the classification system, looked at these radiographs at two separate timepoints to classify the hips using standard radiological measurements. Thereafter, a consensus meeting was held where a modified flow diagram was devised, before a third reading by four raters using a separate set of 74 radiographs took place.Aims
Methods
