Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38283872›Full record

ReviewJournal of orthopaedics2024

Femoral rotational osteotomy for femoroacetabular impingement: A systematic review.

Chase T Nelson, Charles R Reiter, Matthew Harris, Carl Edge, James Satalich, Conor O'Neill, John Cyrus, Alexander Vap

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Chase T NelsonVirginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, VCU Medical Center, 1201 E Marshall St #4-100, Richmond, VA, 23298, USA.
Charles R ReiterVirginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, VCU Medical Center, 1201 E Marshall St #4-100, Richmond, VA, 23298, USA.
Matthew HarrisVirginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, VCU Medical Center, 1201 E Marshall St #4-100, Richmond, VA, 23298, USA.
Carl EdgeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University Hospital, Box 980153, Richmond, VA, 23298-0153, USA.
James SatalichDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University Hospital, Box 980153, Richmond, VA, 23298-0153, USA.
Conor O'NeillDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke Health, 200 Trent Dr Ste 1F, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
John CyrusHealth Sciences Library, MCV Campus at Virginia Commonwealth University, 509 N. 12th St., Box 980582, Richmond, VA, 23298-0582, USA.
Alexander VapDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University Hospital, Box 980153, Richmond, VA, 23298-0153, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To synthesize existing literature regarding the indications and outcomes of femoral rotational osteotomies (FDO) for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) due to. Methods: Medline, Cochrane, and Embase were searched using keywords "femoroacetabular impingement", "rotational osteotomy" and others to identify FAI patients undergoing FDO. Double-screened studies were reviewed by blinded authors according to inclusion criteria. Data from full texts was extracted including study type, number of patients, sex, mean age, surgical indication, type of dysplasia, associated pathology, surgical technique, follow-up, and pre-op/post-op evaluations of the following: impingement test, femoral version (FV), 'other angles measured', outcome scores, range of motion (ROM). Results: 7 studies including 91 patients (97 FDO surgeries), 73 females (80 %) with mean age of 28.3 years, and follow-up mean of 2.44 ± 2.83 years. Pain or impingement was the most common clinical indication, while others included aberrant FV and ROM measurements for both anteverted and retroverted femurs. There were reports of FDO being performed with concomitant procedures addressing other pathology. Various outcome scores and ROM measurements showed postoperative improvement after FDO. Complication data was sparse, preventing aggregation. The rate of unplanned reoperation was 40 % (where reported), with 'hardware removal' being the most common. Conclusions: FDO is effective in treating FAI due to increased FV, improving clinical symptoms, and potentially delaying articular degeneration. Hardware removal surgery remains an inherent risk in undergoing FDO. Further work is needed to discover indications warranting FDO as a primary treatment versus hip arthroscopy. Level of evidence: This review contains 4 studies with Level IV evidence and 3 studies with Level III evidence.

Indexed as

Femoral rotational osteotomyFemoral versionFemoroacetabular impingementSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38283872
PMCPMC10818154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.