Activity Tolerance After Periacetabular Osteotomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Periacetabular osteotomy is a well-described surgical intervention for symptomatic acetabular deformities in skeletally mature patients. Data regarding return to athletic activity or sport after this procedure are still limited. PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of patients to return to preoperative levels of activity after periacetabular osteotomy. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of active patients treated with periacetabular osteotomy for acetabular deformity correction. Patients were identified as those with preoperative University of California-Los Angeles activity levels ≥7. Patient demographics, operative data, radiographic measures, and clinical outcomes were documented prospectively. The University of California-Los Angeles activity score, Harris Hip Score, Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index were used to measure clinical outcomes, and details regarding activity and satisfaction were analyzed. RESULTS: This study included 36 patients (39 hips; 15 males and 21 females) whose average age was 25 years (range, 15-45 years) and whose average body mass index was 24 ± 3.5 kg/m(2). Mean follow-up was 33 months (range, 18-59 months). Preoperatively, the average lateral center edge angle, anterior center edge angle, and acetabular index were 10°, 14°, and 21°, respectively; 92% of patients had a Tönnis osteoarthritis grade of 0 or 1. One patient failed hip preservation surgery and went on to total hip arthroplasty 27 months after periacetabular osteotomy. Of the remaining patients, 71% reported an increase or no change in activity level postoperatively. The University of California-Los Angeles score was also unchanged (9.2 vs 8.8, P = .157), and the Harris Hip Score (63 vs 87, P < .001), Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Quality of Life (38 vs 71, P < .001), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (71 vs 92, P < .001) results improved from preoperative levels. There was a 97% rate of satisfaction with the surgery. Four patients (11%) reported hip pain as the primary factor limiting postoperative activity. CONCLUSION: The majority (71%) of active patients with hip dysplasia return to presurgical or higher activity levels after open hip preservation surgery with the periacetabular osteotomy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".