Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Latest
    • Archive
    • home
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
    • Join SMJ
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Office
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Advertising
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Folders
    • Help
  • Other Publications
    • NeuroSciences Journal

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Saudi Medical Journal
  • Other Publications
    • NeuroSciences Journal
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Saudi Medical Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Latest
    • Archive
    • home
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
    • Join SMJ
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Office
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Advertising
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Folders
    • Help
  • Follow psmmc on Twitter
  • Visit psmmc on Facebook
  • RSS
Research ArticleOriginal Article
Open Access

Intraoperative medial wall disruption in Dega pelvic osteotomy

Does it effect the radiographic outcome at medium-term?

Murat Danişman, Rıza Mert Çetik, Ozan Tuncay and Güney Yilmaz
Saudi Medical Journal July 2023, 44 (7) 687-693; DOI: https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2023.44.7.20230192
Murat Danişman
From the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Danişman), Giresun University, Giresun; from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Çetik), Sandıklı State Hospital, Afyon; and from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Tuncay, Yilmaz), Hacettepe University, Ankara,Turkey.
M.D
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Murat Danişman
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Rıza Mert Çetik
From the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Danişman), Giresun University, Giresun; from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Çetik), Sandıklı State Hospital, Afyon; and from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Tuncay, Yilmaz), Hacettepe University, Ankara,Turkey.
M.D
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ozan Tuncay
From the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Danişman), Giresun University, Giresun; from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Çetik), Sandıklı State Hospital, Afyon; and from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Tuncay, Yilmaz), Hacettepe University, Ankara,Turkey.
M.D
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Güney Yilmaz
From the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Danişman), Giresun University, Giresun; from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Çetik), Sandıklı State Hospital, Afyon; and from the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Tuncay, Yilmaz), Hacettepe University, Ankara,Turkey.
M.D.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the radiographic outcomes of our patients who encountered medial wall disruption, with those who did not while undergoing Dega osteotomy.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 95 hips with developmental dysplasia of the hip who were treated with Dega pelvic osteotomy. Hips were divided into 2 groups according to medial wall disruption: group A included the hips with medial wall disruption, while group B included the hips without disruption. Preoperative, immediate postoperative, 12 weeks and last follow-up anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis were reviewed for changes in the acetabular index (AI) between groups.

Results: There were 22 hips in group A and 73 hips in the group B. Preoperative (34.6 versus [vs] 37.2, p=0.231), postoperative (17.9 vs 18.4, p=0.682), 12th week (18 vs 18, p=0.504) and last follow-up (13.3 vs 15.1, p=0.097). The acetabular index measurements were comparable between the groups. Corrections achieved during surgery, and during the follow-up period were also comparable between the two groups, indicating no loss of radiographic correction caused by medial wall disruption. Ninety one percent of the patients in group A and 90% of group B achieved good or excellent results according to the Severin classification (p=0.944).

Conclusion: Our study shows that disruption of the medial wall did not have a significant detrimental effect on radiographic correction when performing Dega osteotomy.

Keywords:
  • developmental dysplasia of the hip
  • Dega pelvic osteotomy
  • intraoperative complications

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is a spectrum of disorders that range from acetabular dysplasia without subluxation to irreducible hip dislocation. If left untreated, DDH can result in hip pain and osteoarthritis by early adulthood. The treatment aims to obtain a stable, congruent, and concentric hip joint as early as possible to allow remodeling of the acetabulum and proximal femur with minimal complications.1,2

Treatment of DDH usually becomes more challenging as age increases. After the child reaches walking age, most surgeons agree that the treatment must include a pelvic osteotomy to ensure adequate femoral head coverage.3,4 Among the different types of pelvic osteotomies, Salter, triple pelvic osteotomy (TPO), Pemberton, and Dega are the most commonly used. Salter5 and TPO6 are redirectional osteotomies aimed to reorient the acetabulum, whereas Pemberton7 and Dega8 are reshaping osteotomies that change the shape, and hence the dimensions, of the acetabulum.

Wiktor Dega first published his pelvic osteotomy technique in the Polish language in 1969;but this technique gained popularity only after being published in the English language in 2001.9,10 This technique is a supraacetabular semicircular incomplete osteotomy that allows correction of anterior, lateral, and posterior deficiencies by hinging into the triradiate cartilage.11 When the acetabular dysplasia is severe, Dega osteotomy is the selected procedure as it provides remarkable correction of the acetabular index (AI).4,12,13

During the procedure, the inner cortex of the ilium may be accidentally penetrated by the osteotome, which can be seen as a technical error. In our cases with this error, we observed a disruption of the medial wall on the intraoperative fluoroscopic views and further radiographs. Thus, an incomplete osteotomy has become a complete osteotomy and may result in instability, graft displacement, or failure of correction of acetabular dysplasia. Our study aims to compare the radiographic outcomes of our patients who encountered penetration of the inner ilium cortex, with those who did not while undergoing Dega osteotomy.

Methods

This study is carried out at the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hacettepe University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. We retrospectively reviewed patients with DDH who underwent Dega osteotomy at our institution, between January 2015 and January 2021. The main indication for Dega osteotomy was acetabular dysplasia according to the radiographic parameters, including AI, subluxation of the hip, or a shallowed acetabulum. Patients who were diagnosed with a disorder other than DDH (such as, teratological hip dislocation), who underwent previous acetabular surgery, or had a follow-up period of less than 1 year were excluded from the study. As a retrospective study, all procedures performed on the patients were part of the routine care, and no patients were recalled specifically for this study.

All patients were operated on by the same surgeon. Open reduction, femoral shortening, or derotation osteotomy were also performed if considered necessary by the surgeon, and the decision was made intraoperatively. If a femoral osteotomy was performed, then the femoral graft was used at the pelvic osteotomy site. In all other cases, the autograft was harvested from the iliac bone in triangular pieces. The graft was seated into the osteotomy site by using an impactor with gentle mallet blows until the graft is flush with the outer cortex of the ilium. The stability of the osteotomy site was clinically confirmed by stressing the proximal portion of the osteotomy, and if found to be stable, no additional fixation was performed. At the end of the procedure, radiographs were taken before and after the application of the spica cast to prevent the occurrence of loss of correction. Patients were immobilized in a hip spica cast for 6 weeks postoperatively.

Ninety-five Dega osteotomies were performed on 75 patients, and 20 of them were bilateral. Twenty-two hips of 21 patients with medial wall disruption were identified in the immediate postoperative radiographs (Figure 1). Accordingly, we classified the hips into 2 groups to explore potential differences: group A includes hips with medial wall disruption, whereas group B includes hips without disruption. Compared with the patients without disruption, the cast duration was not modified for these patients, and no brace was advised after the removal of the cast. Thus, the postoperative course was identical. Previous surgical treatments and adjunct procedures at the time of Dega pelvic osteotomy were recorded. Preoperative, immediate postoperative, 12 weeks, and last follow-up anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis were reviewed by xone surgeon on the hospital PACS system (Centricity PACS, GE Healthcare). Radiographs at postoperative 12 weeks and the last follow-up were selected to evaluate the short-term and final results. The acetabular index was used as the primary outcome measure to compare between groups.14 Additionally, the values of the acetabular depth ratio (ADR)15 were recorded preoperatively and at the last follow-up. The Severin classification system was also used as a secondary outcome measure.16 Classes 1, 2 and 3 were established as excellent, good and fair while classes 4, 5 and 6 are all considered poor. For comparison between groups, the Severin classification was further grouped into 2 categories as <3 and ≥3. Possible triradiate cartilage injury was noted. Ethical approval was obtained from the local ethics committee (protocol number: 16969557-1558). Patients’ legal guardians gave written informed consent for participation in the study.

Figure 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1

- Examples of postoperative radiographs after Dega pelvic osteotomy: a) Intact medial walls after bilateral osteotomy, b) Left hip demonstrates medial wall disruption after osteotomy.

Statistical analyses

Statistical analyses were performed using the software package SPSS (IBM Corp. Released 2015. IBM SPSS Statistics for Mac OS, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY). Descriptive statistics are presented as means, standard deviations, and ranges. When comparing means between study groups, the Mann–Whitney U test and student’s t-test were used for non-parametric and parametric data groups.. Wilcoxon’s signed rank test and paired samples t-test were to compare dependent variables. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were used for cross-tabulation statistics. The threshold for statistical significance was designated as p<0.05.

Results

Table 1 summarizes the demographic and radiographic characteristics of the groups. The average length of follow-up was 2.6 years (ranging 1–6.1 years). Group A had 22 hips (21 patients) and group B had 73 hips (54 patients).. The average age at the time of the procedure and average follow-up length were comparable between groups ((p=0.113 for age and p=0.778 for follow-up). Preoperative AI values were comparable between groups (p=0.231).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

- Radiographic and demographic characteristics of the study groups.

Table 1 presents the mean AI values during the study period. Corrections in AI achieved at surgery, which is measured by calculating the difference between preoperative and postoperative AI measurements for each patient, are significant for both groups (p<0.001 for both groups). Corrections achieved during the follow-up period, both at 12 weeks and until final follow-up, were also comparable between the 2 groups, indicating no loss of radiographic correction caused by medial wall disruption. When the last follow-up AI measurements were compared with the immediate postoperative values, significant reductions were seen in each group (p<0.001 for both groups). Figure 2 demonstrates the measured AI values and comparisons between groups.

Figure 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2

- Acetabuler index values and comparisons between groups.

Preoperative (p=0.363) and final (p=0.181) ADR values were comparable between groups and both groups showed significant improvements in ADR values during the study period (p<0.001 for each). According to the Severin classification, 20 of 22 hips (91%) were excellent and good in group A, compared with 66 of 73 hips (90%) in group B with the same result (Table 1). No significant difference was observed between groups (p=0.944). Four of 73 (6%) hips in group B were classified as a poor result according to the Severin classification, 2 of which were redislocation, and the other 2 were resubluxation. All the patients refused revision surgery, except for one. No radiographic sign of triradiate cartilage injury was observed in the entire study population up to the last follow-up radiographs.

Table 2 summarizes the additional surgical procedures performed in the study groups. The groups are comparable in terms of previous reduction and revision rates. The simultaneous surgery rate was significantly higher in group B (p=0.021). In group A, 3 (14%) of the previous reductions were closed, and 5 (23%) were open. In group B, 12 (17%) of the previous reductions were closed, and 9 (12%) were open. In group A, 3 (14%) of the simultaneous surgeries were open reductions, and 3 (9%) were open reduction and femoral shortening osteotomies. In group B, 21 (29% of the simultaneous surgeries were open reductions, and 16 (22%) were open reduction and femoral shortening osteotomies.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

- Additional surgical procedures in the study groups.

Discussion

Although the treatment of DDH starts at an early period by early diagnosis using clinical and ultrasound screening programs, residual acetabular dysplasia continues to be a significant problem in the spectrum of DDH. Therefore, the need for pelvic osteotomies will remain. Although different types of pelvic osteotomies have been described, their main purpose is to delay the development of early osteoarthritis. Each technique has unique advantages, and none of them is unequivocally superior to another.

Dega osteotomy is a versatile procedure that provides coverage to all kinds of acetabular deficiencies. Although the original surgical technique is still debated, the classical Dega osteotomy is performed by cutting through the lateral wall of the ilium directed toward but not through its inner cortex.17 The hinge point is mainly at the triradiate cartilage, and anterior, lateral, or posterior deficiencies can be treated by relocating the graft.10,13 Dega osteotomy is also intrinsically stable, and further stabilization is not needed. Therefore additional surgery for implant removal is prevented. Moreover, it does not produce limb-length discrepancy and can be safely performed bilaterally in the same surgical session.18 The main disadvantages of this osteotomy are the need for fluoroscopic guidance and open triradiate cartilage.

Several authors reported excellent and satisfactory medium and long-term results of Dega osteotomy.10,11,19-26 A recent study that published the results of open reduction, Dega osteotomy, and proximal femoral osteotomy in delayed diagnosis of DDH showed that survival rates were 73% at 40 years in patients who were operated on before the age of 5 years.24

AI remains a reliable radiographical parameter in the evaluation of acetabular development.26 The mean AI of all hips in this study population was corrected from 36.6 degrees (°) preoperatively to 14.6° at the last follow-up. The 22° improvement in AI in our study was also comparable with the 18°–25° results shown in previous studies.10,11,19,20,23,25 Thus, our study confirms the efficacy of Dega pelvic osteotomy in reducing AI to near-normal values (Figure 3).

Figure 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3

- Radiographs of a 3-year-old girl who underwent bilateral Dega pelvic osteotomy: a) Bilateral acetabular dysplasia and broken Shenton’s line can be seen on x-ray, b) Excellent acetabular containment achieved 16 months after surgery.

The acetabular depth ratio is a radiographic parameter that measures the width and depth of the acetabulum. Similar to AI, it reflects acetabular development. In both groups, the mean ADR values were improved to normal percentiles at the last follow-up.15 Although the effect of Dega pelvic osteotomy on the acetabular volume is controversial, the final ADR values in this study support the idea that Dega pelvic osteotomy does not reduce the acetabular volume.1,27,28

The radiological results of this study are satisfactory in both groups according to the Severin classification. We found no statistically significant difference between the groups (Table 1). However, the rate of excellent results is greater in group A (32%) compared to those in group B (27%). Similarly, no poor results were observed in group A, whereas 6% occurred in group B. We can attribute these differences to the higher rates of simultaneous surgery, such as open reduction and/or femoral shortening osteotomy in group B, and possibly to the higher Tonnis grades.

Despite satisfactory results, every surgery, including the Dega osteotomy, has its respective risks. Complications may occur during the surgery due to the incompletely ossified bony structure of young children. We have intraoperatively detected a disruption of the medial wall in rare cases, particularly after unwanted penetration of the osteotome. In such cases, we hypothesized that potential instability related to medial wall disruption may cause graft extrusion or impaction on the osteotomy level and an associated loss of correction. In our study, no graft displacement occurred in any hip with or without disruption. Furthermore, all of the hips with disruption showed similar acetabular indices compared with the group without disruption, not only in the short term but also in the final follow-up. These results indicate that in hips with medial wall disruption, the thick periosteum may still provide stability even after iatrogenic damage. It can be protective against graft displacement until graft incorporation for short-term follow-up. Additionally, considerations for acetabular remodeling due to the osteotomy and reduction of the hip may explain the similar results obtained in the long-term follow-up.29-31 Furthermore, a recent study on graft displacement showed that similar radiologic outcomes could be achieved with spontaneous remodeling after a conservative approach.32

Another complication that may occur due to medial wall disruption is triradiate cartilage injury. The most common radiographic findings of triradiate cartilage injury are widening or narrowing of the triradiate cartilage gap, bone bridge formation, triradiate cartilage ossification, and premature closure.33,34 In most cases, these findings become apparent in the first year after trauma. None of the hips in the current series had radiographic signs of triradiate cartilage injury during the follow-up period (Figure 4). Nevertheless, the hips with medial wall disruption were likely extremely small to reveal differences that may have been clinically important.

Figure 4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4

- Radiographs of a 3-year-old patient who underwent left Dega pelvic osteotomy: a) Medial wall disruption can be seen on left hip x-ray, b) There was no radiographic sign of triradiate cartilage injury 36 months after surgery.

This study has several limitations. First, this study is retrospective and has a small sample size. Second, no control group with healthy hips was set to compare acetabular development. Moreover, the patients were not examined until skeletal maturity to monitor triradiate cartilage and acetabulum development. However, including 75 patients with 95 treated hips, we report one of the largest studies investigating the radiological outcome of Dega osteotomy in DDH.

In conclusion, our study shows that intraperative disruption of the medial wall did not have a significant detrimental effect on radiographic correction when performing Dega osteotomy in addition to showing the satisfactory results of Dega osteotomy in the treatment of acetabular dysplasia. This is the first study in the literature reporting on this technical error, and we believe that when this happens, the treatment course can safely remain unchanged and there will be no need for additional measures (prolonged casting period, fixation, and so on).

Acknowledgment

The authors gratefully acknowledge Scribendi (www.scribendi.com) for the English language editing.

Footnotes

  • Disclosure. Authors have no conflict of interests, and the work was not supported or funded by any drug company.

  • Received March 18, 2023.
  • Accepted June 21, 2023.
  • Copyright: © Saudi Medical Journal

This is an Open Access journal and articles published are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (CC BY-NC). Readers may copy, distribute, and display the work for non-commercial purposes with the proper citation of the original work.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Gillingham BL,
    2. Sanchez AA,
    3. Wenger DR.
    Pelvic osteotomies for the treatment of hip dysplasia in children and young adults. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1999; 7: 325–337.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Kotlarsky P,
    2. Haber R,
    3. Bialik V,
    4. Eidelman M.
    Developmental dysplasia of the hip: What has changed in the last 20 years? World J Orthop 2015; 6: 886–901.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    1. Huang SC,
    2. Wang JH.
    A comparative study of nonoperative versus operative treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip in patients of walking age. J Pediatr Orthop 1997; 17: 181–188.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Venkatadass K,
    2. Durga Prasad V,
    3. Al Ahmadi NMM,
    4. Rajasekaran S.
    Pelvic osteotomies in hip dysplasia: Why, when and how? EFORT Open Rev 2022; 7: 153–163.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Salter RB.
    Innominate osteotomy in the treatment of congenital dislocation and subluxation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg (Brit) 1961; 43: 518–539.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    1. Tonnis D,
    2. Behrens K,
    3. Tscharani F.
    A modified technique of the triple pelvic osteotomy: Early results. J Pediatr Orthop 1981; 1: 241–249.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Pemberton PA.
    Pericapsular osteotomy of the ilium for treatment of congenital subluxation and dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1965; 47: 65–86.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Dega W.
    [transiliac osteotomy in the treatment of congenital hip dysplasia]. Chir Narzadow Ruchu Ortop Pol 1974; 39: 601–613.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Dega W.
    [selection of surgical methods in the treatment of congenital dislocation of the hip in children]. Chir Narzadow Ruchu Ortop Pol 1969; 34: 357–366.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Grudziak JS,
    2. Ward WT.
    Dega osteotomy for the treatment of congenital dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001; 83: 845–854.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Czubak J,
    2. Kowalik K,
    3. Kawalec A,
    4. Kwiatkowska M.
    Dega pelvic osteotomy: Indications, results and complications. J Child Orthop 2018; 12: 342–348.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Galpin RD,
    2. Roach JW,
    3. Wenger DR,
    4. Herring JA,
    5. Birch JG.
    One-stage treatment of congenital dislocation of the hip in older children, including femoral shortening. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989; 71: 734–741.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Selberg CM,
    2. Chidsey B,
    3. Skelton A,
    4. Mayer S.
    Pelvic osteotomies in the child and young adult hip: Indications and surgical technique. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2019; 28: e230–e237.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    1. Hilgenreiner H.
    Zur fuhdiagnose und fruhbehandlung der angeboren huftgelenkverrenkung. Med. Klin 1925; 21: 1425–1429.
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    1. Novais EN,
    2. Pan Z,
    3. Autruong PT,
    4. Meyers ML,
    5. Chang FM.
    Normal percentile reference curves and correlation of acetabular index and acetabular depth ratio in children. J Pediatr Orthop 2018; 38: 163–169.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    1. Severin E.
    Contribution to the knowledege of congenital dislocation of the hip joint, late results of closed reduction and arthrographic studies of recent cases. Acta Chir Scand 1941; 84: 37.
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.↵
    1. Ibrahim MM,
    2. El-Lakkany MR,
    3. Wahba MM,
    4. El-Ganainy AA,
    5. Aly AM.
    Combined open reduction and dega transiliac osteotomy for developmental dysplasia of the hip in walking children. Acta Orthop Belg 2019; 85: 545–553.
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    1. Karlen JW,
    2. Skaggs DL,
    3. Ramachandran M,
    4. Kay RM.
    The dega osteotomy: A versatile osteotomy in the treatment of developmental and neuromuscular hip pathology. J Pediatr Orthop 2009; 29: 676–682.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Aksoy C,
    2. Yilgor C,
    3. Demirkiran G,
    4. Caglar O.
    Evaluation of acetabular development after dega acetabuloplasty in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop B 2013; 22: 91–95.
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    1. Al-Ghamdi A,
    2. Rendon JS,
    3. Al-Faya F,
    4. Saran N,
    5. Benaroch T,
    6. Hamdy RC.
    Dega osteotomy for the correction of acetabular dysplasia of the hip: A radiographic review of 21 cases. J Pediatr Orthop 2012; 32: 113–120.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.
    1. Pruszczynski B,
    2. Synder M,
    3. Drobniewski M,
    4. Borowski A.
    More than 20 years of experience with dega transiliac osteotomy in the treatment of dislocated hip joints in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop B 2021; 32: 221–226.
    OpenUrl
  22. 22.
    1. Braatz F,
    2. Staude D,
    3. Klotz MC,
    4. Wolf SI,
    5. Dreher T,
    6. Lakemeier S.
    Hip-joint congruity after dega osteotomy in patients with cerebral palsy: Long-term results. Int Orthop 2016; 40:1663–1668.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Ruszkowski K,
    2. Pucher A.
    Simultaneous open reduction and dega transiliac osteotomy for developmental dislocation of the hip in children under 24 months of age. J Pediatr Orthop 2005; 25: 695–701.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Wozniak L,
    2. Idzior M,
    3. Jozwiak M.
    Open reduction, dega osteotomy and proximal femoral osteotomy in delayed diagnosis of developmental hip dislocation: Outcome at 40-year follow-up. J Child Orthop 2021; 15: 171–177.
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    1. Akgul T,
    2. Bora Goksan S,
    3. Bilgili F,
    4. Valiyev N,
    5. Hurmeydan OM.
    Radiological results of modified dega osteotomy in tonnis grade 3 and 4 developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop B 2014; 23: 333–338.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Li Y,
    2. Guo Y,
    3. Li M,
    4. Zhou Q,
    5. Liu Y,
    6. Chen W, et al.
    Acetabular index is the best predictor of late residual acetabular dysplasia after closed reduction in developmental dysplasia of the hip. Int Orthop 2018; 42: 631–640.
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    1. Gigi R,
    2. Lawniczak D,
    3. Kurian B,
    4. Madan S,
    5. Fernandes J.
    Acetabular volume and femoral coverage change following dega-like osteotomy in treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop B 2022; 31: 247–253.
    OpenUrl
  28. 28.↵
    1. Ozgur AF,
    2. Aksoy MC,
    3. Kandemir U,
    4. Karcaaltncaba M,
    5. Aydingoz U,
    6. Yazici M, et al.
    Does dega osteotomy increase acetabular volume in developmental dysplasia of the hip? J Pediatr Orthop B 2006; 15: 83–86.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Akagi S,
    2. Tanabe T,
    3. Ogawa R.
    Acetabular development after open reduction for developmental dislocation of the hip. 15-year follow-up of 22 hips without additional surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 1998; 69: 17–20.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  30. 30.
    1. Carsi MB,
    2. Clarke NM.
    Acetabuloplasties at open reduction prevent acetabular dysplasia in intentionally delayed developmental dysplasia of the hip: A case-control study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474: 1180–1188.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    1. Szepesi K,
    2. Rigo J,
    3. Biro B,
    4. Fazekas K,
    5. Poti L.
    Pemberton’s pericapsular osteotomy for the treatment of acetabular dysplasia. J Pediatr Orthop B 1996; 5: 252–258.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Bakarman KA,
    2. Rafiq Z.
    Acetabular remodeling after graft extrusion, rotation or impaction in dega and pemberton acetabuloplasties for developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop B 2022; 31: 327–333.
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    1. Dong Y,
    2. Wang J,
    3. Qin J,
    4. Nan G,
    5. Su Y,
    6. He B, et al.
    Retrospective analysis of traumatic triradiate cartilage injury in children. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2021; 22: 674.
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    1. Liporace FA,
    2. Ong B,
    3. Mohaideen A,
    4. Ong A,
    5. Koval KJ.
    Development and injury of the triradiate cartilage with its effects on acetabular development: Review of the literature. J Trauma 2003; 54: 1245–1249.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Saudi Medical Journal: 44 (7)
Saudi Medical Journal
Vol. 44, Issue 7
1 Jul 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Saudi Medical Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Intraoperative medial wall disruption in Dega pelvic osteotomy
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Saudi Medical Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Saudi Medical Journal web site.
Citation Tools
Intraoperative medial wall disruption in Dega pelvic osteotomy
Murat Danişman, Rıza Mert Çetik, Ozan Tuncay, Güney Yilmaz
Saudi Medical Journal Jul 2023, 44 (7) 687-693; DOI: 10.15537/smj.2023.44.7.20230192

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Intraoperative medial wall disruption in Dega pelvic osteotomy
Murat Danişman, Rıza Mert Çetik, Ozan Tuncay, Güney Yilmaz
Saudi Medical Journal Jul 2023, 44 (7) 687-693; DOI: 10.15537/smj.2023.44.7.20230192
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgment
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • The factors affecting comfort and the comfort levels of patients hospitalized in the coronary intensive care unit
  • Exploring communication challenges with children and parents among pharmacists in Saudi Arabia
  • Exploring hypothyroidism’s effects on lipid profiles
Show more Original Article

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • developmental dysplasia of the hip
  • Dega pelvic osteotomy
  • intraoperative complications

CONTENT

  • home

JOURNAL

  • home

AUTHORS

  • home
Saudi Medical Journal

© 2025 Saudi Medical Journal Saudi Medical Journal is copyright under the Berne Convention and the International Copyright Convention.  Saudi Medical Journal is an Open Access journal and articles published are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (CC BY-NC). Readers may copy, distribute, and display the work for non-commercial purposes with the proper citation of the original work. Electronic ISSN 1658-3175. Print ISSN 0379-5284.

Powered by HighWire