TP1.7 Short-Term Outcomes of Treatment of Borderline Acetabular Dysplasia Differ Relative to Amount of Instability: A Multicenter ANCHOR ORBIT Study Comparing Hip Arthroscopy and Periacetabular Osteotomy

Clicks: 11
ID: 331032
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #349 of 444 articles by views in Journal of hip preservation surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 444 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Limited evidence exists to guide surgical decision-making in borderline acetabular dysplasia (BD) between isolated hip arthroscopy (HA) or periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). The purpose of this study was to compare short-term outcomes (minimum 6 months) of BD treated with (1) isolated HA or (2) PAO (with or without arthroscopy) including stratification by relative instability. Methods A prospective multicenter cohort study was performed of the primary surgical treatment of BD. The cohort included 541 hips with lateral center edge angle (LCEA) 18°-25° treated across 30 surgeons. PROs utilized included HOOS pain, HOOS sports, mHHS, and iHOT-12, assessed at baseline through six-month follow-up. The BHIS was previously developed and validated to quantify key patient factors driving treatment decisions and includes relative weighting of the following clinical and radiographic parameters (mean 50, range 0-100): acetabular inclination, anterior center-edge angle, alpha angle, and internal rotation at 90° flexion. Outcomes were stratified by BHIS scores of <50 (more stable hips) and >50 (more unstable hips), as well as >60 (highly unstable). Results The cohort included 541 hips of which 52.5% underwent HA and 47.5% underwent PAO. Minimum six-month follow-up was available in 80.1% of hips. The BHIS subgroups included BHIS>50 (more unstable) in 50.2% and BHIS<50 in 49.8%. In the unstable subgroup, there was a non-significant trend towards greater improvement in HOOS pain (less pain) in the PAO group than the HA group at 6 months (28.0 ± 19.7 vs 22.2 ± 22.1, p = 0.07). In highly unstable hips (BHIS > 60), improvement in HOOS pain from baseline was significantly higher (less pain) in the PAO group than the HA group at 6 months (30.8 ± 20.8 vs 25.0 ± 14.6, p = 0.027). In the more stable subgroup, HOOS sports scores were significantly higher with HA compared to PAO (81.3 ± 18.7 vs 73.9 ± 22.9, p = 0.039). Conclusion Subgroups of patients with BD can be treated effectively with both HA and PAO depending on severity of instability. At minimum 6-month follow-up, PAO demonstrates improved outcomes for highly unstable borderline hips while HA demonstrates superior early outcomes for more stable borderline hips.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220387008 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Jeffrey J. Nepple, Abhav Garde, Anchor Study Group, John C. F. Clohisy
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of hip preservation surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jhps/hnag043.143
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnag043.143
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.