Hip preservation surgery for borderline and frank dysplasia: an overview of systematic reviews.

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Pierre Martz, Jerome Magendie, Sonia Ramos-Pascual, Ankitha Kumble, Benoît Boutaud, Nicolas Verdier
{"title":"Hip preservation surgery for borderline and frank dysplasia: an overview of systematic reviews.","authors":"Pierre Martz, Jerome Magendie, Sonia Ramos-Pascual, Ankitha Kumble, Benoît Boutaud, Nicolas Verdier","doi":"10.1530/EOR-23-0152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To identify, synthesise, and critically appraise findings of systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses on hip preservation surgeries for borderline and/or frank dysplasia with or without concomitant femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search, following the PRISMA guidelines, was conducted using Medline and Embase on 19/04/2023. Findings extracted from eligible studies were tabulated and synthesised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search identified 477 references. Nineteen were eligible for data extraction: nine reported on arthroscopy, five reported on periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), one reported on shelf acetabuloplasty, and one reported on Chiari osteotomy, while two compared arthroscopy versus PAO, and one compared PAO versus rotational acetabular osteotomy (RAO) versus eccentric acetabular osteotomy (ERAO). The nomenclature and lateral centre edge angle (LCEA) thresholds to define hip dysplasia varied widely across included studies. All hip preservation surgeries provided good outcomes, with the Harris hip score (HHS) being the most commonly reported clinical score. Using the AMSTAR checklist for risk of bias, no systematic reviews were rated as high quality; ten were rated as moderate quality; six were rated as low quality; and three were rated as critically low quality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most published systematic reviews on hip preservation surgery are of moderate or low quality, and there is high heterogeneity among them regarding outcomes reported, follow-up periods, and definitions of dysplasia. The authors recommend the following thresholds and nomenclature for dysplasia: LCEA < 20° for frank dysplasia, 20°-25° for borderline dysplasia, and >25° for no dysplasia. Although all hip preservation surgeries can provide good outcomes, it is challenging to conclude which surgery provides the best outcomes and to determine if treatment options are dependent on LCEA.</p>","PeriodicalId":48598,"journal":{"name":"Efort Open Reviews","volume":"9 12","pages":"1144-1155"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11619730/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Efort Open Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1530/EOR-23-0152","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To identify, synthesise, and critically appraise findings of systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses on hip preservation surgeries for borderline and/or frank dysplasia with or without concomitant femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

Methods: A search, following the PRISMA guidelines, was conducted using Medline and Embase on 19/04/2023. Findings extracted from eligible studies were tabulated and synthesised.

Results: The search identified 477 references. Nineteen were eligible for data extraction: nine reported on arthroscopy, five reported on periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), one reported on shelf acetabuloplasty, and one reported on Chiari osteotomy, while two compared arthroscopy versus PAO, and one compared PAO versus rotational acetabular osteotomy (RAO) versus eccentric acetabular osteotomy (ERAO). The nomenclature and lateral centre edge angle (LCEA) thresholds to define hip dysplasia varied widely across included studies. All hip preservation surgeries provided good outcomes, with the Harris hip score (HHS) being the most commonly reported clinical score. Using the AMSTAR checklist for risk of bias, no systematic reviews were rated as high quality; ten were rated as moderate quality; six were rated as low quality; and three were rated as critically low quality.

Conclusions: Most published systematic reviews on hip preservation surgery are of moderate or low quality, and there is high heterogeneity among them regarding outcomes reported, follow-up periods, and definitions of dysplasia. The authors recommend the following thresholds and nomenclature for dysplasia: LCEA < 20° for frank dysplasia, 20°-25° for borderline dysplasia, and >25° for no dysplasia. Although all hip preservation surgeries can provide good outcomes, it is challenging to conclude which surgery provides the best outcomes and to determine if treatment options are dependent on LCEA.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Efort Open Reviews
Efort Open Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: EFORT Open Reviews publishes high-quality instructional review articles across the whole field of orthopaedics and traumatology. Commissioned, peer-reviewed articles from international experts summarize current knowledge and practice in orthopaedics, with the aim of providing systematic coverage of the field. All articles undergo rigorous scientific editing to ensure the highest standards of accuracy and clarity. This continuously published online journal is fully open access and will provide integrated CME. It is an authoritative resource for educating trainees and supports practising orthopaedic surgeons in keeping informed about the latest clinical and scientific advances. One print issue containing a selection of papers from the journal will be published each year to coincide with the EFORT Annual Congress. EFORT Open Reviews is the official journal of the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (EFORT) and is published in partnership with The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信