Medial versus anterior approach for open reduction of hip in children with DDH under two years - A meta-analysis of comparative studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Open reduction (OR) is usually required in developmental dysplasia of hip (DDH) for children below 24 months of age, those who failed to achieve a satisfactory reduction by the closed method. OR in this age group can be performed either through a medial or anterior approach. However, there is a paucity of literature and a lack of more substantial evidence regarding which approach (medial versus anterior) is superior for performing OR in this age group with minimal complications. Methods: Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) were searched for relevant articles reporting outcomes and complication rates of DDH children less than 24 months undergone OR either through medial or anterior approach using pre-defined keywords. Data on avascular necrosis (AVN) rates, further corrective surgery (FCS) rates, and clinical and radiological grading using McKay clinical criteria and Severin radiological criteria were assessed. Meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan (Review Manager 5.4) software. Results: Five comparative studies, having a minimum of two-year follow-up, were included for final analysis. According to the MINORS tool assessment, all five studies were of good to high quality. Of 257 hips, 151 and 106 underwent OR through medial and anterior approaches, respectively. Our meta-analysis showed a statistically significant (p = 0.01) number of AVN cases with the anterior approach compared to the medial approach. The overall random effect showed the odds of having AVN with an anterior approach to be 2.27 (95% CI: 1.18,4.38) times more than the same with a medial approach. Regarding FCS rates, the meta-analysis depicted no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.63). The two groups had no statistically significant difference regarding clinical and radiological outcomes using McKay and Severin criteria, respectively. Following surgery, improvement in the acetabular index from pre-operative value showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.48). Conclusions: Medial approach is safe and effective for OR of the hip in DDH up to 24 months of age. Our analysis showed that AVN rates are lower with a medial approach than the anterior approach, with similar clinical and radiological outcomes and rates of FCS. However, one should consider the surgeon's expertise while choosing between these approaches.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".