Abstract:Background Understanding the implications of either nonoperative or operative treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) performed before periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is critical to counseling patients and their families. There are limited studies, however, on PAO for the treatment of residual DDH after surgical intervention during childhood, and even less information about PAO after prior nonoperative treatment. Questions/purposes We analyzed patients who had undergone PAO for DDH and asked: Did patients with prior childhood treatment (either operative or nonoperative) (1) improve less in modified Harris hip score (mHHS), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) score, or WOMAC score; (2) demonstrate more severe preoperative deformities; and (3) receive less complete radiographic correction and have more frequent complications than did patients whose hips had not undergone prior treatment? We also asked: (4) Were there subgroup differences among patients with DDH treated nonoperatively versus operatively before PAO in these same functional and radiographic parameters? Methods Between January 2011 and December 2020, a total of 90 PAOs were performed in 82 patients who had prior surgical or nonsurgical treatment. Of those, 3 patients (3 hips) with neuromuscular diseases were excluded, 4 patients (5 hips) were excluded for having received treatment after childhood, 7 hips that had undergone bilateral PAOs were excluded, and another 4 patients (4 hips) were lost to follow-up before the minimum study period of 2 years, leaving 71 patients (71 hips) for analysis (the previous treatment group). Among these, 32 patients had a history of previous surgery (the previous surgery group), and 39 patients had prior nonsurgical treatment (such as a Pavlik harness, closed reduction, spica casting) (the previous nonoperative group). During the same period, 1109 PAOs were performed in 956 patients who had no history of previous hip treatment. Following a 1:2 ratio, 142 patients (142 hips) were selected as the control group by matching for age (within 2 years difference), year of surgery (same year), and follow-up time (within 1-year difference). The patient characteristics for both the previous treatment group and the control group exhibited comparability, with mean ± SD follow-up durations of 49 ± 23 months and 48 ± 19 months, respectively. Within the previous 5 years, 3 patients (8%) in the previous nonoperative group, 4 patients (13%) in the previous surgery group, and 15 patients (11%) in the control group had not attended follow-up visits. We compared hip function and radiographic results between the two groups and performed a subgroup analysis between the previous surgery group and the previous nonoperative group. Hip function was assessed using the mHHS questionnaire, the WOMAC, and the iHOT-12 with attention to the minimum clinically important differences of these tools. The threshold values for clinically important improvement were 9.6 points, 13 points, and 16.1 points for the mHHS, iHOT-12, and WOMAC, respectively. Radiographic measurements included the lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), anterior center-edge angle (ACEA), Tönnis angle, acetabulum-head index, and acetabular wall index. We also evaluated Tönnis osteoarthritis grade and femoral head deformity. Occurrences of adverse radiographic events such as posterior column fracture, nonunion, stress fractures, insufficient coverage or overcoverage, acetabular protrusion, and progression of osteoarthritis were recorded. Results We found no clinically important differences in magnitude of improvement between the previous treatment group and the control group in terms of mHHS (mean ± SD 10 ± 12 versus 12 ± 12; p = 0.36), iHOT-12 (25 ± 18 versus 26 ± 19; p = 0.51), or WOMAC score (12 ± 12 versus 15 ± 19; p = 0.17). Preoperative deformity in the previous treatment group was more severe than in the control group (mean ± SD LCEA -1° ± 9° versus 5° ± 8°; ACEA -8° ± 18° versus 1° ± 14°; Tönnis angle 31° ± 7° versus 27° ± 7°; acetabulum-head index 56% ± 13% versus 61% ± 8%; all p < 0.001). In the previous treatment group, a higher percentage of patients exhibited flattening or irregularity of the femoral head compared with the control group (52% versus 9%; p < 0.001), and there was also a higher proportion of patients with Tönnis grade 1 or above (51% versus 42%; p < 0.001). Although there were still differences in LCEA, ACEA, and Tönnis angle between the two groups at the last follow-up, the differences were small, and the mean values were within the normal range. The previous treatment group had a higher risk of intraoperative posterior column fracture (14% and 5%; p = 0.02), insufficient acetabular coverage (20% and 8%; p -Abstract Truncated-

Open reduction after failed closed reduction following failed Pavlik harness treatment in developmental dysplasia of the hip: One- or two-stage?

Double-level Osteotomy and One-Stage Reconstruction with Long Intramedullary Femoral Nail to Correct a Severe Proximal and Diaphyseal Femur Deformity in a Patient with Polyostotic Fibrous Dysplasia: Case Report and Literatures Review.

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Stiffness Following Open Reduction for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip

Comparison of open reduction alone and open reduction plus Dega osteotomy in developmental dysplasia of the hip

Comparison of clinical and radiological outcomes for the anterior and medial approaches to open reduction in the treatment of bilateral developmental dysplasia of the hip: a systematic review protocol

Liquid-culture production of blastospores of the bioinsecticidal fungus Paecilomyces fumosoroseus using portable fermentation equipment

Gradual Reduction Using Overhead Traction for Late-Detected Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Report of Three Cases Diagnosed Among Children Over Four Years Old

The efficacy of gradual reduction using two-stage traction for developmental dysplasia of the hip in southern China

Anterior approach with mini-bikini incision in open reduction in infants with developmental dysplasia of the hip

Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: Controversies in Management

Outcome analysis of different surgical methods for the treatment of hip dysplasia

Rates and risk factors for failure of reduction in closed reduction in developmental dysplasia of the hip: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Failure of Pavlik Harness Treatment in Infants Under 6 Months Old with Dislocated Hips: Short- and Intermediate-Term Results of Subsequent Treatment Modalities

Surgical treatment for developmental dysplasia of hip in older children

[Total Hip Arthroplasty for Crowe Type IV Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip with S-ROM Prosthesis].

MRI Predictors of Residual Dysplasia in Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip Following Open and Closed Reduction

Is Prior Nonoperative or Operative Treatment of Dysplasia of the Hip Associated With Poorer Results of Periacetabular Osteotomy?

Hip arthrogram parameters predict radiographic outcomes of patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip treated by closed reduction

Follow-up Value of Hip Medial Ultrasound in Infants and Children With Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip Treated With Reduction and Spica Casting

Outsourcing for Achieving Mass Customization in Service Operations: Lessons from the "Smaller Kitchen" Strategy in Chinese Catering Services

Post-THA gait training to improve pelvic obliquity and decrease leg length discrepancy in DDH patients: a retrospective study