ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2024
Comparison of treatment methods in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Background/aim: This study aimed to compare the results of Pemberton osteotomy (PO), Salter innominate osteotomy (SO), open reduction (OR), and closed reduction (CR) applied in the treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Materials and methods: Included in the study were 101 hips of 82 patients treated at our orthopedic clinic between 2017 and 2023. The patients were evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the final follow-up. The results were evaluated based on Barret's clinical and Severin's radiological classifications. Those who developed avascular necrosis (AVN) were evaluated based on Bucholz-Ogden's classification. Results: In terms of the preoperative acetabular angles (AAs), those for hips treated with PO were significantly higher than those of the other three, and those treated with SO were significantly higher than those of the other two (OR and CR) (p < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the final follow-up AAs of those treated with SO and PO compared to those treated with OR and CR (p < 0.001). The best corrections were achieved with PO (average: 27.94 ± 4.89°). There was a significant difference between PO and OR, and PO and CR in terms of the preoperative collodiaphyseal angles (CDAs) (p < 0.05). The greatest decrease was in those treated with PO (average: 22.44 ± 9.45°). AVN developed at various stages in 15 of 79 hips (14.85%) that were treated surgically. While AVN developed at a rate of 22.22% with PO, 18.18% with SO, and 17.85% with OR, no AVN developed in the 22 hips treated with CR. Conclusion: Understanding normal and abnormal values by age is essential for selecting appropriate treatments. Acetabulum-related surgeries should be planned for patients over 1.5 years of age with an AA above 30°. Early diagnosis and CR treatments yield excellent results and low AVN rates. Various DDH treatments in our clinic have shown low AVN rates, indicating safety and efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.