Acetabular cover in congenital dislocation of the hip

Ogata, Satoshi; Moriya, Hideshige; Tsuchiya, K.; Akita, Tohru; Kamegaya, Makoto; Someya, Masayuki

doi:10.1302/0301-620x.72b2.2312554

Cited by 195 publications

(158 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

140

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that females with nondypslastic acetabuli were 4°more anteverted than males, similar to findings by Anda et al (3°) [2] and Tallroth and Lepistö (5°) [63]; most other studies did not specify anteversion by sex [4,27,29,30]. Acetabular anteversion for both sexes was no different with dysplastic and nondysplastic acetabuli [3,4,13,29,33,46,48,51,56]. The superior portion of the acetabulum (Torsion 1) was retroverted and the inferior portion (Torsion 2) was anteverted relative to the widest aspect of the acetabulum.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Whereas plain radiographs demonstrate superolateral subluxation, axial CT scans make it possible to quantify abnormalities in acetabular orientation and define acetabular defects of the anterior and posterior walls [14,56,72]. Since the mid-1980s, computer software has been available to summarize serial CT scan images, producing twodimensional (2-D) reconstructions and three-dimensional (3-D) surface volumes [42,67,70].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Are Dysplastic Hips Different? A Three-dimensional CT Study

Bosse

Wedge

Babyn

2015

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Surgical correction of acetabular dysplasia can postpone or prevent joint degeneration. The specific abnormalities that make up the dysplastic hip are controversial. Questions/purposes (1) What are the relative size, shape, and orientations of the typical nondysplastic hip? (2) How do these variables differ in the developmentally dysplastic hip? (3) Are there version differences between the acetabuli of dysplastic and nondysplastic hips? (4) Are there pairs of variables in which the change in one is always accompanied by a change in the other for both nondysplastic and dysplastic acetabuli? Methods Of 117 consecutive three-dimensional (3-D) CT scans performed for hip dysplasia between March 1988 and October 1995, 48 met criteria of developmentally dysplastic hips by plain radiography. These were retrospectively compared with 55 pelvic 3-D CT scans culled from 81 consecutive scans performed for reasons other than hip dysplasia (ie, hip pain, trauma, infection) that did not affect the hip or pelvic landmarks. The 3-D reconstructions were orientated anatomically for standardization of the measurements to be compared. Representative 3-D volumes of the acetabular space were constructed from which we could measure anatomic positions and dimensional information. One author performed all image orientation and measurements. Results Nondysplastic acetabuli are essentially hemispheric with height equal to width and twice the depth. The dysplastic acetabuli were elongated in females (52.4 ± 6.2 mm for dysplastic versus 46.5 ± 4.6 mm for nondysplastic (mean difference, 5.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-8.0; p = 0.002) and shallower in both females (18.7 ± 4.9 mm for dysplastic versus 23.6 ± 4.0 mm for nondysplastic; mean difference, 6.5; 95% CI, 4.4-8.5; p \ 0.0001) and males (21.1 ± 4.8 mm for dysplastic versus 25.0 ± 4.3 mm for nondysplastic, mean difference, 5.3; 95% CI, 2.6-8.1; p = 0.0002); width was similar to that of nondysplastic hips. Acetabular openings were slightly more vertical than nondysplastic hips in females (5°; 95% CI, 1.9-8.1; p = 0.002) but not in male subjects. The dysplastic acetabuli were smaller in volume (18% in females, p = 0.002, and 19% in males, p = 0.0012) and had less space occupied by the femoral head compared with nondysplastic hips (p \ 0

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Are Dysplastic Hips Different? A Three-dimensional CT Study

Bosse

Wedge

Babyn

2015

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We measured acetabular index (AI) [16] and centre-edge angle (CE-A; measured at the anterior acetabular edge according to the method of Ogata et al) [17,18]. The longest diameter of the capital femoral ossific nucleus on the affected hip was measured, and we evaluated its ratio to that on the unaffected side as a/a 0 (only available in the unilaterally affected children) (Fig.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acetabular development after open reduction to treat dislocation of the hip after walking age

Kagawa

Endo

Tetsunaga

et al. 2016

Journal of Orthopaedic Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBackground: Treatment of hip dislocation diagnosed after walking age is often difficult. We report the surgical treatment of these patients by open reduction with a soft tissue surgical procedure without osteotomy. Methods: Thirty-eight children (43 hips) diagnosed with complete dislocation of the hip after walking age were included in this study. We radiographically analysed postoperative hip joint development up to 6 years of age. To assess the predictors of acetabular development, we evaluated the radiographs, using an acetabular index of 35 and a centre-edge angle of >5 at 6 years of age as satisfactory outcomes, and evaluated the advance of acetabular development over time. Results: AI on the affected side was improved with time after open reduction. The diameter of the capital femoral ossific nucleus on the affected side was almost equivalent to that on the unaffected side at 6e12 months after surgery, after which the centre-edge angle improved gradually from one year after surgery. We compared hips classified as satisfactory to unsatisfactory at 6 years of age, and found that the centreedge angle at one year after open reduction was significantly associated with acetabular development (P ¼ 0.044). The cut-off value was À2 with sensitivity of 0.909 and specificity of 0.677. Conclusions:The results of the current study suggest that initial development of the capital femoral ossific nucleus after open reduction would be followed by improved joint congruity, and that this would facilitate acetabular development. The centre-edge angle at one year after surgery could be regarded as a potential predictor of acetabular development in open reduction surgery for late-diagnosed developmental dysplasia of the hip cases.

show abstract

“…Radiological success results were evaluated according to the Ömeroğlu et al classification (19). Acetabulum evaluation was measured according to criteria reported by Ogata et al (20), and other radiographic measurements [acetabular index (AI), centeredge (CE) angle, head-neck angle, acetabular (Sharp angle etc.)] were obtained according to the original descriptions (21).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%