Do Femoral or Salter Innominate Osteotomies Improve Femoral Head Sphericity in Legg-Calvé-Perthes Disease? A Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, the authors of two prospective multicenter observational studies recommended surgery to improve head sphericity in older children, whereas large retrospective observational studies suggest that surgery does not improve head sphericity in older children. Thus, the treatment for Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease (LCPD) remains controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Using a meta-analysis we asked whether femoral varus osteotomy (FVO) or Salter innominate osteotomy (SIO) resulted in better radiographic head sphericity at the end of the disease process as compared with nonsurgical modalities. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature using the key concepts LCPD, operative treatment, and nonoperative treatment. Of 160 abstracts, 57 full-text studies were reviewed and 14 papers chosen for meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess the impact of age and stage of disease. The odds of a spherical head after operative compared with nonoperative treatment were calculated to measure effect size for each study and a pooled odds ratio (OR) calculated. RESULTS: Head sphericity improved (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.60) by FVO or SIO as compared with patients treated nonoperatively. In children younger than 6 years, it did not alter femoral head sphericity (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.45-2.36); children 6 years of age and older were more likely to have better femoral head sphericity from surgical treatment than nonoperative treatment (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.28-3.26). CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest FVO or SIO in patients with LCPD disease who are older than 6 years of age during or before the fragmentation phase should be considered.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".