ArticleInternational orthopaedics2025
Revision open reduction in developmental dysplasia of the hip.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The prevalence of clinically significant proximal femoral growth disturbance following open versus closed reduction in dysplastic hips performed after 6 months: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 150 studies.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Late closed or open reduction of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRe-dislocation after open reduction remains a challenge in the treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Few geographically and temporally diverse reports exist on the topic. The aim of this study was to uncover the outcome in a group of DDH patients who underwent repeat open reduction.
methodsAll patients who had DDH surgery were screened at one hospital, spanning a ten-year period. Patients who underwent repeat open reduction for re-dislocation were included. Clinical data and radiographic parameters were obtained. This is a retrospective cohort study.
resultsTwenty-three revision open reductions were included. The median age (interquartile range) was 40 (26-61) months and the median follow-up duration was 26 (14-55.50) months. Fifteen revisions (65%) had at least one notable complication. Recurrent instability was found in nine revisions (39%), and other complications included avascular necrosis, stiffness and leg length discrepancy in 12 revisions (52%). Although it did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.13), all hips with pre-revision international hip dysplasia institute grade III (n = 4), compared to grade IV, remained stable after the re-operation.
conclusionsThere is a substantial risk of dismal prognosis after repeat open reduction. Moreover, every precaution should be taken during the first surgery to reduce the risk of re-operation. Findings from this study may help inform surgeons and caregivers about the probable negative outcome when contemplating repeat open reduction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39470767What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.