ArticleInternational orthopaedics2025
Radiographic and functional outcomes of shelf acetabuloplasty versus conservative management in legg-calvé-perthes disease: an age- and gender-matched study including healthy controls for isokinetic hip muscle strength.
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 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.
- Hip shelf arthroplasty for acetabular dysplasia in adolescents and adults long-term results.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionShelf acetabuloplasty, one of surgical containment methods, have been employed to preserve hip joint congruity in the management of Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease (LCPD). However, its long-term effect on radiographic and functional outcomes remains unclear due to limited evidence. Moreover, comparative studies against conservative treatment are lacking. This study aimed to (1) compare the mid- to long-term outcomes between children with advanced-stage LCPD treated with shelf acetabuloplasty and those receiving conservative management, and (2) evaluate isokinetic hip muscle strength compared to age- and gender-matched healthy controls. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective age- and gender-matched study included 28 children with unilateral LCPD, divided into Shelf (n = 14) and Conservative (n = 14) treatment groups. A healthy control group (n = 14) was also recruited for isokinetic comparisons. Radiographic outcomes were assessed using modified Stulberg classification and several quantitative parameters. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and isokinetic testing of hip muscle strength.
resultsThe Shelf group (median follow-up: 5.5 years, IQR: 4-7) showed significantly better HHS (67.9 ± 15.9) compared to the Conservative group (median follow-up: 6 years, IQR: 5-8) (54.6 ± 13.3; p = 0.024) at the final follow-up. Shelf acetabuloplasty also resulted in significantly improved radiographic parameters, including centre-edge angle (p < 0.001) and femoral head coverage (p = 0.002). Isokinetic testing revealed that the Conservative group had significantly lower hip extension (p = 0.021), abduction (p = 0.018), and adduction (p = 0.027) torque values, as well as greater muscle fatigue (p = 0.014). In contrast, the Shelf and Control groups exhibited comparable performance in most strength and endurance parameters.
conclusionsShelf acetabuloplasty, when applied as a salvage procedure in advanced-stage LCPD, may provide better functional outcomes and improved hip muscle performance compared to conservative treatment, despite comparable long-term femoral head morphology. Following Shelf acetabuloplasty, comparable hip flexor and extensor strength to healthy controls can be expected, although mild abductor and adductor weakness may persist.
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.