Effect of Prior Salter or Chiari Osteotomy on THA with Developmental Hip Dysplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the outcome of THA after prior pelvic osteotomy. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We conducted a retrospective chart and radiographic review to obtain outcome measures for perioperative complications, acetabular and femoral component revisions, Harris hip score, and survivorship and compared these outcomes for patients presenting with developmental dysplasia of the hip treated surgically using THA with and without prior pelvic osteotomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed 103 primary THAs in 87 patients with osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip with a minimum 3-year followup. Previous pelvic osteotomy was performed in 52 hips (Salter, 40; Chiari, nine; Salter and Chiari, three), and 51 hips had no previous surgery (control group). RESULTS: The pelvic osteotomy group did not have higher rates of femoral or acetabular intraoperative fracture or dislocation compared with the control group. The overall revision rate was 28.8% in the pelvic osteotomy group compared with 19.6% in the control group. The revision rate for aseptic loosening was 23.1% in the pelvic osteotomy group compared with 17.6% in the control group. Harris hip scores (range, 20-87) were not compromised, and overall survivorship rates 8 years postoperatively were not different at any time between the pelvic osteotomy (83.3%) and control (88.4%) groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prior pelvic osteotomy did not lead to a higher perioperative complication rate, higher revision rate, compromised Harris hip score, or shortened survivorship in eventual THA in developmental dysplasia of the hip. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".