Capsular Mechanics After Periacetabular Osteotomy for Hip Dysplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hip dysplasia is characterized by insufficient acetabular coverage around the femoral head, which leads to instability, pain, and injury. Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) aims to restore acetabular coverage and function, but its effects on capsular mechanics and joint stability are still unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of PAO on capsular mechanics and joint range of motion in dysplastic hips. METHODS: Twelve cadaveric dysplastic hips (denuded to bone and capsule) were mounted onto a robotic tester and tested in multiple positions: (1) full extension, (2) neutral 0°, (3) flexion of 30°, (4) flexion of 60°, and (5) flexion of 90°. In each position, the hips underwent internal and external rotation, abduction, and adduction using 5 Nm of torque. Each hip then underwent PAO to reorient the acetabular fragment, preserving the capsular ligaments, and was retested. RESULTS: The PAO reduced internal rotation in flexion of 90° (∆IR = -5°; p = 0.003), and increased external rotation in flexion of 60° (∆ER = +7°; p = 0.001) and flexion of 90° (∆ER = +11°; p = 0.001). The PAO also reduced abduction in extension (∆ABD = -10°; p = 0.002), neutral 0° (∆ABD = -7°; p = 0.001), and flexion of 30° (∆ABD = -8°; p = 0.001), but increased adduction in neutral 0° (∆ADD = +9°; p = 0.001), flexion of 30° (∆ADD = +11°; p = 0.002), and flexion of 60° (∆ADD = +11°; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: PAO caused reductions in hip abduction and internal rotation but greater increases in hip adduction and external rotation. The osseous acetabular structure and capsule both play a role in the balance between joint mobility and stability after PAO.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".