Table 2.
Progression of acetabular index angle, incidence and severity of avascular necrosis, and need for secondary surgical intervention
| Variable | Group 1 (22 hips) | Group 2 (43 hips) | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acetabular index (°) | |||
| Pre-reduction (mean ± SD) | 36.6 ± 3.6 | 35.9 ± 2.9 | 0.42 |
| First year follow-up (mean ± SD)a | 26.8 ± 3.1 | 25.5 ± 2.7 | 0.33 |
| Final follow-up (mean ± SD)a | 20.6 ± 3.1 | 21.3 ± 2.5 | 0.22 |
| AI improvement (mean ± SD) | − 14.8 ± 3.5 | − 14.3 ± 3.2 | 0.35 |
| Findings of avascular necrosis after closed reductionb | |||
| No findings of AVN | 17(86.4%) | 36(83.8%) | |
| Total number of the hips with AVN | 5(13.6%) | 7(16.2%) | 0.53 |
| Grade 1 | |||
| Changes affecting the ossific nucleus | 5 | 5 | |
| Grade 2 | |||
| Lateral physeal damage | 0 | 0 | |
| Grade 3 | |||
| Central physeal damage | 0 | 2 | |
| Grade 4 | |||
| Total damage to the head and the physis | 0 | 0 | |
| Secondary surgical interventions during follow-up | |||
| Total secondary intervention (n/%) | 13 (59.1%) | 11 (25.5%) | 0.014 |
| Type of secondary surgery and number of operated patients | |||
| Need closed re-reduction during follow-up | 1 | 3 | |
| Pelvic osteotomy | 5 | 1 | |
| Open reduction | 2 | 2 | |
| Open reduction + pelvic osteotomy | 5 | 4 | |
| Open reduction + pelvic + femoral osteotomy | 0 | 1 | |
statistically significant p values are in bold
SD standard deviation, AI acetabular index, AVN avascular necrosis, SD standard deviation, n number
aThe patients who underwent secondary surgery were excluded
bKalamchi and MacEwen classification