Table 4. Comparison of Results from Published Studies.
| Study | Year | Age (yr) | Number* (hip/patient) | Technique | Outcome | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Functional | Radiological | |||||
| Ning et al.12) | 2014 | 9.6±1.2 | 82/78 | OR+FS in all | Excellent: 6 | I: 21 |
| Salter: 10 | Good: 8 | II: 8 | ||||
| Pemberton: 8 | Fair: 43 | III: 13 | ||||
| Steel: 62 | Poor: 25 | ≥IV: 40 | ||||
| Chiari: 2 | ||||||
| Yagmurlu et al.1) | 2013 | 8–14 | 9/6 | OR+FS | Excellent: 1 | I: 3 |
| Salter: 4 | Good: 2 | II: 2 | ||||
| Triple 5 | Fair: 4 | III: 3 | ||||
| Poor: 2 | ≥IV: 1 | |||||
| El-Tayeby6) | 2009 | 8–18 | 19/16 | OR+FS in all | Excellent: 10 | I: 13 |
| Salter: 12 | Good: 5 | II: 3 | ||||
| Triple: 7 | Fair: 3 | III: 2 | ||||
| Poor: 1 | ≥IV: 1 | |||||
| Papavasiliou and Papavasiliou4) | 2005 | 10–17 | 16/11 | OR+FS | Harris hip score, mean (range) : 90.3 (72–101) | I: 4 |
| No pelvic osteotomy | II: 9 | |||||
| III: 3 | ||||||
| ≥IV: - | ||||||
| Dogan et al.13) | 2005 | 9–14 | 13/10 | OR+FS | I: 9 | |
| Salter: 1 | II: 1 | |||||
| EAGA: 10 | III: | |||||
| Dega: 1 | ≥IV: 3 | |||||
| Chiari: 1 | ||||||
| Wada et al.14) | 2003 | 9.3 | 17/17 | OR+FS+Pemberton in all cases | Excellent:13 | I: 8 |
| Good: 1 | II: 5 | |||||
| Fair: 3 | III: 1 | |||||
| Poor: | ≥IV: 3 | |||||
| Karakas¸ et al.11) | 1995 | 8–17 | 19/18 | OR+FS+Salter osteotomy in all cases | Excellent: 2 | I: 2 |
| Good: 9 | II: 8 | |||||
| Fair: 5 | III: 7 | |||||
| Poor: 3 | ≥IV: 2 | |||||
| Present study | 2018 | 8–15 | 77/65 | OR+FS | Excellent: 22 | I: 38 |
| Salter: 12 | Good: 44 | II:19 | ||||
| Double: 18 | Fair: 9 | III: 14 | ||||
| Triple: 47 | Poor: 2 | ≥IV: 6 | ||||
Ages are presented as mean±standard deviation, range, or mean only.
OR: open reduction, FS: femoral shortening, EAGA: extra-articular grafting acetabuloplasty
* The number of cases quoted does not represent all patients included in study. Only patients older than 8 years of age are shown.