Open Access Peer-reviewed Research Article

Main Article Content

Craig R Louer
James D Bomar
Jessica L Hughes
Scott J Mubarak
Dennis R Wenger
Vidyadhar V Upasani corresponding author

Abstract

Purpose: There is significant variability in brace treatment indications for infantile acetabular dysplasia in the absence of hip dislocation or subluxation. This study’s purpose was to evaluate characteristics of treated and untreated patients in our practice.
Methods:  A retrospective chart review was performed of patients aged 0-12 months who were referred to orthopedics with concern for DDH. Demographic and clinical information, as well as provider and radiographic information were recorded for analysis. Five surgeons were independently asked to review de-identified radiographs and note which subjects warranted treatment. A consensus diagnosis of “dysplasia”, “no dysplasia”, or a lack of consensus were considered as independent variables. Univariate and Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis was performed to determine predictors of treatment.
Results:  Mean acetabular inclination (30.6º vs. 28.2º; p=0.006) and the incidence of abnormal abduction (p=0.002) were higher for the group that was treated for dysplasia. CART analysis showed that patients with a consensus diagnosis of radiographic dysplasia were more likely to receive treatment than those without consensus, or a consensus of no dysplasia (p<0.001). If consensus was not reached, then abnormal abduction on exam was the next strongest predictor of treatment (p<0.001). Radiographic impression, which was the primary determinant of treatment, exhibited only fair intrarater and interrater reliability.
Conclusions:  We studied factors that led to the diagnosis and treatment of DDH in an infant population. We observed that radiographic impression and abnormal abduction on exam were the only reliable factors predictive of treatment among our practice.

Keywords
mild acetabular dysplasia, DDH, DDH treatment decisions

Article Details

How to Cite
Louer, C., Bomar, J., Hughes, J., Mubarak, S., Wenger, D., & Upasani, V. (2020). Deciding whether to treat isolated mild dysplasia in infantile DDH: Identifying factors in decision making. Theory and Clinical Practice in Pediatrics, 2(1), 32-37. https://doi.org/10.25082/TCPP.2020.01.003

References

  1. Godward S and Dezateux C. Surgery for congenital dislocation of the hip in the UK as a measure of outcome of screening. MRC Working Party on Congenital Dislocation of the Hip. Medical Research Council. Lancet, 1998, 351(9110): 1149-1152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)10466-4
  2. Murphy SB, Ganz R and M¨uller ME. The prognosis in untreated dysplasia of the hip. A study of radiographic factors that predict the outcome. The Journal of Bone and Joint surgery. American volume, 1995, 77(7): 985-989. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199507000-00002
  3. Terjesen T. Residual hip dysplasia as a risk factor for osteoarthritis in 45 years follow-up of late-detected hip dislocation. Journal of Children’s Orthopaedics, 2011, 5(6): 425- 431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11832-011-0370-2
  4. Wenger DR . Is There a Role for Acetabular Dysplasia Correction in an Asymptomatic Patient? Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 2013, 33(supl 1): 8-12. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0b013e3182771764
  5. Sarkissian EJ, Sankar WN, Baldwin K, et al. Is there a predilection for breech infants to demonstrate spontaneous stabilization of DDH instability? Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 2014, 34(5): 509-513. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000000134
  6. Gans I, Flynn JM and Sankar WN. Abduction bracing for residual acetabular dysplasia in infantile DDH. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 2013, 33(7): 714-718. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0b013e31829d5704
  7. Broughton N, Brougham D, Cole W, et al. Reliability of radiological measurements in the assessment of the child’s hip. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 1989, 71(1): 6-8. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.71b1.2915007
  8. Weinstein SL. The Importance of Natural History. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 2019, 39(6): 6-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000001336
  9. Louer CR, Bomar JD, Pring ME, et al. Should paediatricians initiate orthopaedic hip dysplasia referrals for infants with isolated asymmetric skin folds? Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 2019, 13(6): 593-599. https://doi.org/10.1302/1863-2548.13.190090
  10. Boniforti FG, Fujii G, Angliss RD, et al. The reliability of measurements of pelvic radiographs in infants. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 1997, 79(4): 570- 575. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.79b4.7238
  11. Novais EN, Pan Z, Autruong PT, et al. Normal Percentile Reference Curves and Correlation of Acetabular Index and Acetabular Depth Ratio in Children. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 2018, 38(3): 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000000791
  12. Paterson D. The early diagnosis and treatment of congenital dislocation of the hip[J]. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Surgery, 1976, 46(4): 359-366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1976.tb03249.x
  13. Omeroˇglu H and Koparal S. The role of clinical examination and risk factors in the diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a prospective study in 188 referred young infants. Archives of Orthopaedic & Trauma Surgery, 2001, 121(1- 2): 7-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004020000186
  14. Stein-Zamir C, Volovik I, Rishpon S, et al. Developmental dysplasia of the hip: Risk markers, clinical screening and outcome. Pediatrics International, 2008, 50(3): 341-345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-200X.2008.02575.x
  15. Stoffelen D, Urlus M, Molenaers G, et al. Ultrasound, Radiographs, and Clinical Symptoms in Developmental Dislocation of the Hip. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics B, 1995, 4(2): 194-199. https://doi.org/10.1097/01202412-199504020-00012