Periacetabular Osteotomy After Failed Hip Arthroscopy for Labral Tears in Patients with Acetabular Dysplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic mechanical overload of the acetabular rim may lead to acetabular labral disease in patients with hip dysplasia. Although arthroscopic debridement of the labrum may provide symptomatic relief, the underlying mechanical abnormality remains. There is little information regarding how the results of periacetabular osteotomy are affected by a prior primary treatment for labral disease in the presence of acetabular dysplasia. METHODS: In a retrospective matched-cohort study, seventeen patients who had arthroscopic labral debridement prior to periacetabular osteotomy (the arthroscopy group) were compared with a control group of thirty-four patients who did not undergo arthroscopic labral debridement prior to periacetabular osteotomy (the non-arthroscopy group). Two control patients were randomly matched to each experimental patient from a pool of controls. Functional outcomes were assessed with use of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Failure of periacetabular osteotomy was defined as conversion to a total hip replacement. RESULTS: Changes in the preoperative and postoperative WOMAC scores of arthroscopy and non-arthroscopy patients were comparable, and the differences between the two treatment groups were not significant. We were unable to show a significant difference between the seventeen arthroscopy and thirty-four non-arthroscopy patients with regard to the risk of having to undergo a total hip replacement. CONCLUSIONS: When arthroscopic labral debridement fails to improve symptoms in patients with labral disease secondary to acetabular dysplasia, periacetabular osteotomy may still be considered as a joint-preserving procedure that can achieve good functional results.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".