ArticleCureus2025
Evaluating the Short-Term Impact of Closed Versus Open Reduction Techniques on Acetabular Remodeling in Developmental Hip Dysplasia.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDevelopmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) encompasses abnormalities in the acetabulum or the femoral head, ranging from mild dysplasia to complete dislocation. The primary goal of DDH treatment is to achieve and maintain a concentric reduction of the hip joint, allowing for normal acetabular and femoral head remodeling.
methodThis retrospective study reviewed records of patients treated for idiopathic DDH between 2016 and 2021 at a single institution. Patients included had undergone either closed or open reduction and completed at least two years of follow-up. Demographic data and radiographic assessments at multiple intervals postreduction were collected and analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 29 (Released 2023; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States).
resultsA total of 41 patients (64 hips) were included, with a mean age at reduction of 6.92 months and a follow-up duration of 51.5 months. Closed reduction was performed on 38 hips, while 26 hips underwent open reduction. The mean age at reduction was significantly lower in the closed reduction group (4.58 months) compared to the open reduction group (10.34 months). The mean preoperative acetabular index (AI) decreased from 37.39 to 19.54 in the closed reduction group and from 36.74 to 19.4 in the open reduction group.
conclusionThe study found no significant difference between closed and open reduction techniques in acetabular remodeling. While residual dysplasia and avascular necrosis (AVN) were more common in the closed group, the differences were not statistically significant. Further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods is recommended to confirm these findings.
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.