Does a Graf Type-I Hip Justify the Discontinuation of Pavlik Harness Treatment in Patients with Developmental Dislocation of the Hip?

• Published in: Children (Basel) 2022-05, Vol.9 (5), p.752
• Main Authors: Li, Yiqiang, Canavese, Federico, Liu, Yanhan, Wu, Jianping, Li, Jingchun, Yuan, Zhe, Zhou, Qinghe, Liu, Yuanzhong, Chen, Weidong, Xu, Hongwen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: acetabular index; Age; developmental dysplasia of the hip; hip ultrasound; Morphology; Neuromuscular diseases; Pavlik harness; Pediatrics; residual acetabular dysplasia; Statistical analysis; Success
• ISSN: 2227-9067; 2227-9067
• DOI: 10.3390/children9050752

Background: To analyze the clinical data of patients aged < 6 months with developmental dislocation of the hip (DDH) treated with Pavlik Harness (PH) in order to identify the best time to terminate PH treatment. Method: Fifty-four patients (47 females, 7 males; 63 hips) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study; there were 33 (61.1%) left, 12 (22.2%) right and 9 (16.7%) bilateral DDH. The mean age at diagnosis was 11.8 ± 5.9 weeks (range, 1.4−25.5). All patients underwent fulltime PH treatment for about three months. At completion of PH treatment, patients were then divided into Group A, including patients with clinically stable hip joint and Graf type-I hip on ultrasound (US), and Group B, including patients with clinically stable hip joint and well-reduced hip on anterior-posterior (AP) radiographs without acetabular dysplasia. Six months after completion of PH treatment, the presence/absence of residual acetabular dysplasia (RAD) was evaluated on AP pelvis radiographs. The t-test and chi-square test were used to compare the differences in age, gender, side, Graf classification and RAD rate between the two groups of patients. Results: At completion of PH treatment, 45 hips were in Group A and 18 in Group B. There were no significant differences in age, gender, side, preoperative alpha angle and Graf classification between the two groups. Six months after discontinuation of PH, the AI in Group A (27.1° ± 6.8°) was significantly higher than that in Group B (21.9° ± 3.5°; p = 0.001); moreover 23 hips (51.1%) in Group A developed RAD compared to one hip in Group B (5.6%; p = 0.001). Among Group A patients, those with RAD were significantly older (13.7 ± 4.9 weeks) than those with normal hips (7.6 ± 3.8 weeks; p < 0.001); the incidence of RAD was significantly lower in patients with Graf type-II D hips (22.2%) than in patients with Graf type-III (70%) and type-IV hips (71.4%; p = 0.006). However, logistic regression analysis identified age as the only risk factor for RAD. All 24 hips with RAD (24/63, 38.1%) were treated with abduction braces. At final follow-up, AI in Group A (20.5° ± 3.3°) was not significantly different from that in Group B (21.9° ± 3.3°; p = 0.132). At the last follow-up visit, five hips (11.1%) in Group A still had RAD, compared to none in Group B (p = 0.31). Conclusions: In patients with DDH treated by PH, Graf type-I on US is not an absolute timing to terminate PH treatment. In addition, patients ≥ 13 weeks had a high ri