Comparison Between Hip Arthroscopic Surgery and Periacetabular Osteotomy for the Treatment of Patients With Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Systematic Review.

Background: The treatment for borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH) has historically been arthroscopic surgery or periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). As orthopaedic surgery is constantly evolving, a lack of comparison of outcomes for these 2 treatment methods could potentially be stalling the progression of treatment for patients with BDDH.
Purpose: To evaluate the existing literature on patient characteristics, procedures, clinical outcomes, and failure rates for patients with BDDH and to determine whether PAO or hip arthroscopic surgery is a better treatment method for patients with BDDH.
Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods: Studies included were found using the following search words: "hip" and "borderline dysplasia," "osteotomy" or "arthroscopy," and "outcome" or "procedure." Articles were included if they detailed participants of all sexes and ages, reported on isolated hips, and had patients diagnosed with BDDH.
Results: A search was conducted across 3 databases, resulting in 469 articles for consideration, from which 12 total studies (10 on arthroscopic surgery and 2 on PAO) were chosen for a review. There were 6 studies that included patients with a lateral center-edge angle of 18° to 25°, while the remainder included patients with a lateral center-edge angle of 20° to 25°. All the studies reviewing arthroscopic surgery reported concomitant/accessory procedures, while the articles on the topic of PAO did not. It was determined that, whether treated using arthroscopic surgery or PAO, outcomes improved across all patient-reported outcome measures. Revision surgery was also common in both procedures.
Conclusion: There is a lack of consensus in the literature on the best treatment option for patients with BDDH. Preoperative patient characteristics and concomitant injuries should be considered when evaluating which surgical procedure will result in the most favorable outcomes.
Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: M.J.P. has received educational support from Linvatec; speaking fees and consulting fees from Smith & Nephew; royalties from DJO, Linvatec, and Smith & Nephew; and hospitality payments from Siemens. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.
(© The Author(s) 2021.)