Preoperative Planning of Periacetabular Osteotomy (PAO)

Pelvic osteotomies improve containment of the femoral head in cases of developmental dysplasia of the hip or in femoroacetabular impingement due to acetabular retroversion. In the evolution of osteotomies, the Ganz Periacetabular Osteotomy (PAO) is among the complex reorientation osteotomies and allows for complete mobilization of the acetabulum without compromising the integrity of the pelvic ring. For the complex reorientation osteotomies, preoperative planning of the required acetabular correction is an important step, due to the need to comprehend the three-dimensional (3D) relationship between acetabulum and femur. Traditionally, planning was performed using conventional radiographs in different projections, reducing the 3D problem to a two-dimensional one. Known disturbance variables, mainly tilt and rotation of the pelvis make assessment by these means approximate at the most. The advent of modern enhanced computation skills and new imaging techniques gave room for more sophisticated means of preoperative planning. Apart from analysis of acetabular geometry on conventional x-rays by sophisticated software applications, more accurate assessment of coverage and congruency and thus amount of correction necessary can be performed on multiplanar CT images. With further evolution of computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery, especially the ability to generate 3D models from the CT data, examiners were enabled to simulate the in vivo situation in a virtual in vitro setting. Based on this ability, different techniques have been described. They basically all employ virtual definition of an acetabular fragment. Subsequently reorientation can be simulated using either 3D calculation of standard parameters of femoroacetabular morphology, or joint contact pressures, or a combination of both. Other techniques employ patient specific implants, templates or cutting guides to achieve the goal of safe periacetabular osteotomies. This chapter will give an overview of the available techniques for planning of periacetabular osteotomy.

Periacetabular osteotomy through the pararectus approach: technical feasibility and control of fragment mobility by a validated surgical navigation system in a cadaver experiment

PURPOSE The pararectus approach has been validated for managing acetabular fractures. We hypothesised it might be an alternative approach for performing periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). METHODS Using four cadaver specimens, we randomly performed PAO through either the pararectus or a modified Smith-Petersen (SP) approach. We assessed technical feasibility and safety. Furthermore, we controlled fragment mobility using a surgical navigation system and compared mobility between approaches. The navigation system's accuracy was tested by cross-examination with validated preoperative planning software. RESULTS The pararectus approach is technically feasible, allowing for adequate exposure, safe osteotomies and excellent control of structures at risk. Fragment mobility is equal to that achieved through the SP approach. Validation of these measurements yielded a mean difference of less <1 mm without statistical significance. CONCLUSION Experimental data suggests the pararectus approach might be an alternative approach for performing PAO. Clinical validation is necessary to confirm these promising preliminary results.

Periacetabular osteotomy restores the typically excessive range of motion in dysplastic hips with a spherical head

BACKGROUND Residual acetabular dysplasia is seen in combination with femoral pathomorphologies including an aspherical femoral head and valgus neck-shaft angle with high antetorsion. It is unclear how these femoral pathomorphologies affect range of motion (ROM) and impingement zones after periacetabular osteotomy. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES (1) Does periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) restore the typically excessive ROM in dysplastic hips compared with normal hips; (2) how do impingement locations differ in dysplastic hips before and after PAO compared with normal hips; (3) does a concomitant cam-type morphology adversely affect internal rotation; and (4) does a concomitant varus-derotation intertrochanteric osteotomy (IO) affect external rotation? METHODS Between January 1999 and March 2002, we performed 200 PAOs for dysplasia; of those, 27 hips (14%) met prespecified study inclusion criteria, including availability of a pre- and postoperative CT scan that included the hip and the distal femur. In general, we obtained those scans to evaluate the pre- and postoperative acetabular and femoral morphology, the degree of acetabular reorientation, and healing of the osteotomies. Three-dimensional surface models based on CT scans of 27 hips before and after PAO and 19 normal hips were created. Normal hips were obtained from a population of CT-based computer-assisted THAs using the contralateral hip after exclusion of symptomatic hips or hips with abnormal radiographic anatomy. Using validated and computerized methods, we then determined ROM (flexion/extension, internal- [IR]/external rotation [ER], adduction/abduction) and two motion patterns including the anterior (IR in flexion) and posterior (ER in extension) impingement tests. The computed impingement locations were assigned to anatomical locations of the pelvis and the femur. ROM was calculated separately for hips with (n = 13) and without (n = 14) a cam-type morphology and PAOs with (n = 9) and without (n = 18) a concomitant IO. A post hoc power analysis based on the primary research question with an alpha of 0.05 and a beta error of 0.20 revealed a minimal detectable difference of 4.6° of flexion. RESULTS After PAO, flexion, IR, and adduction/abduction did not differ from the nondysplastic control hips with the numbers available (p ranging from 0.061 to 0.867). Extension was decreased (19° ± 15°; range, -18° to 30° versus 28° ± 3°; range, 19°-30°; p = 0.017) and ER in 0° flexion was increased (25° ± 18°; range, -10° to 41° versus 38° ± 7°; range, 17°-41°; p = 0.002). Dysplastic hips had a higher prevalence of extraarticular impingement at the anteroinferior iliac spine compared with normal hips (48% [13 of 27 hips] versus 5% [one of 19 hips], p = 0.002). A PAO increased the prevalence of impingement for the femoral head from 30% (eight of 27 hips) preoperatively to 59% (16 of 27 hips) postoperatively (p = 0.027). IR in flexion was decreased in hips with a cam-type deformity compared with those with a spherical femoral head (p values from 0.002 to 0.047 for 95°-120° of flexion). A concomitant IO led to a normalization of ER in extension (eg, 37° ± 7° [range, 21°-41°] of ER in 0° of flexion in hips with concomitant IO compared with 38° ± 7° [range, 17°-41°] in nondysplastic control hips; p = 0.777). CONCLUSIONS Using computer simulation of hip ROM, we could show that the PAO has the potential to restore the typically excessive ROM in dysplastic hips. However, a PAO can increase the prevalence of secondary intraarticular impingement of the aspherical femoral head and extraarticular impingement of the anteroinferior iliac spines in flexion and internal rotation. A cam-type morphology can result in anterior impingement with restriction of IR. Additionally, a valgus hip with high antetorsion can result in posterior impingement with decreased ER in extension, which can be normalized with a varus derotation IO of the femur. However, indication of an additional IO needs to be weighed against its inherent morbidity and possible complications. The results are based on a limited number of hips with a pre- and postoperative CT scan after PAO. Future prospective studies are needed to verify the current results based on computer simulation and to test their clinical importance.

Extra-articular step osteotomy of the olecranon: A biomechanical assessment

BACKGROUND Trans-olecranon chevron osteotomies (COs) remain the gold standard surgical approach to type C fractures of the distal humerus. This technique is associated with a high complication rate and development of an extra-articular olecranon osteotomy may be advantageous. The aim of this study was to compare the load to failure of COs with extra-articular oblique osteotomies (OOs) as well as modified, extra-articular step osteotomies (SOs). METHODS These three osteotomies and their subsequent fixation utilizing a standardized tension band wiring technique were tested in 42 composite analog ulnae models at 20° and 70° of flexion. Triceps loading was simulated with a servo hydraulic testing machine. All specimens were isometrically loaded until failure. Kinematic and force data, as well as interfragmentary motion were recorded. RESULTS At 70°, CO failed at a mean load of 963N (SD 104N), the OO at 1512N (SD 208N) and the SO at 1484N (SD 153N), (P<0.001). At 20°, CO failed at a mean load of 707N (SD 104N) and OO at 1009N (SD 85N) (P=0.006). The highest load to failure was observed for the SO, which was 1277N (SD 172N). The load to failure of the SO was significantly higher than the CO as well as the OO. CONCLUSION Extra-articular osteotomies showed a significantly higher load to failure in comparison to traditional CO. At near full extension (20° of flexion), this biomechanical advantage was further enhanced by a step-cut modification of the extra-articular oblique osteotomy.

Surgical Technique: Reverse Periacetabular Osteotomy

Acetabular retroversion is the result of an externally rotated hemipelvis rather than a focal overgrowth of the anterior wall and/or hypoplasia of the posterior wall. Acetabular retroversion is a cause of pincer impingement which, if left untreated, can lead to hip pain and osteoarthritis. The causal surgical treatment in hips with acetabular retroversion is acetabular reorientation with a reverse periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Indication is based on a positive correlation among symptoms (typically groin pain), physical findings on examination (positive anterior impingement test and decreased flexion and internal rotation), and radiographic signs for acetabular retroversion. These include a positive crossover, posterior wall, and ischial spine sign. A reverse PAO is performed with four osteotomies and a controlled fracture. Unlike reorientation of the acetabular fragment in dysplastic hips, correction for acetabular retroversion is achieved by a combined extension and internal rotation of the acetabular fragment. Typically, a small supra-acetabular wedge resection is required to allow sufficient extension of the fragment. The quality of acetabular reorientation is evaluated by intraoperative AP pelvic radiographs. In addition, intraoperative testing of range of motion following acetabular reorientation is mandatory. An arthrotomy and offset correction of the femoral head-neck area is indicated in hips with decreased internal rotation following acetabular reorientation. In a 10-year follow-up study of reverse PAO, a favorable outcome with preservation of all native joints was found. Correct acetabular orientation and, if necessary, a concomitant offset correction were the keys of successful outcome.