Abstract
Introduction
Several reports demonstrated the overcoverage of the anterior acetabulum. Anterior CE angle over 46°may be a probable risk factor for pincer FAI syndrome after a rotational acetabular osteotomy. In addition, a highly anteverted femoral neck, reported as a risk factor for posterior impingement, has been found in DDH patients. These findings indicate proper acetabular reorientation is essential to avoid anterior or posterior impingement after periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between acetabular three-dimensional (3D) alignment reorientation and clinical range of motion (ROM) after periacetabular osteotomy (PAO).
Methods
A total of 53 patients who underwent curved PAO (CPO) for DDH from January 2014 to April 2017 were selected. Three (5.7%) of them were lost to follow-up. Therefore, the data from 58 hips, contributed by 50 patients (44 women and 6 men), were included in the analysis. Pre- and postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans from the pelvis to the knee joint were performed and transferred to a 3D template software (Zed Hip; Lexi, Tokyo, Japan). The pelvic plane axis was defined according to the functional pelvic plane. The pre- and postoperative lateral and anterior 3D center-edge (CE) angles were measured on the coronal and sagittal views through the center of the femoral head. The pre- and postoperative 3D center-edge (CE) angles and femoral anteversion were measured and compared with clinical outcomes, including postoperative ROM.
Results
The radiographical outcomes of our study are demonstrated in Figure 1. The mean values of pre- and postoperative lateral CE angles were 12.6º±8.7 and 30.2º±9.7, respectively (p<0.001), and mean pre- and postoperative anterior CE angles were 42.4º±15.3 and 63.9º±12.1, respectively (p<0.001). Both CE angles were significantly improved. The correlation between pre- and postoperative acetabular coverage and postoperative ROM was evaluated. Postoperative abduction and internal rotation ROM were significantly associated with postoperative lateral CE angles (abduction; p < 0.001, internal rotation; p = 0.028); flexion and internal rotation ROM was significantly associated with postoperative anterior CE angles (flexion; p < 0.001, internal rotation; p = 0.028). Femoral anteversion was negatively correlated with postoperative abduction (p = 0.017) and external rotation (p = 0.047) ROM (Table 1). Postoperative abduction ROM was strongly positively correlated with femoral anteversion, whereas postoperative external rotation was strongly negatively correlated (Table 2). The total anteversion was strongly correlated with pre- or postoperative ROMs during flexion and internal rotation ROM (Table 2).
Conclusion
Postoperativeanterior acetabular coverage may affect internal rotation ROM more than the lateral coverage. Therefore, the direction of acetabular reorientation should be carefully determined according to 3D alignment during PAO.
For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly.
