Do we need to follow up an early normal ultrasound with a later plain radiograph in children with a family history of developmental dysplasia of the hip?

The risk of DDH between breech and cephalic-delivered neonates using Graf ultrasonography

PURPOSE

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorder in infants. The most significant risk factors include female gender, breech presentation, left hip and family history. In this study, we utilized the Graf method at different time intervals to evaluate both breech-delivered and cephalic-born newborns. The objectives were to compare the incidence of DDH in cephalic and breech-delivered neonates and investigate whether the hip joints of neonates delivered in the breech position exhibit a distinct maturation pattern.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We studied prospectively 618 hip joints (309 newborns). Each hip joint was examined with the Graf method in four time periods as follows: Phase #1 (0-1 weeks), Phase #2 (1-4 weeks), Phase #3 (4-7 weeks), and Phase #4 (7-10 weeks). The α and β angles for each hip joint were measured, and the hips were classified according to Graf classification. With our statistical analysis within the different phases, we were able to investigate potential variations in the maturation patterns between newborns delivered in the breech and cephalic delivery positions.

RESULTS

A significant difference (at the 5% level) was observed in Phase 1 between breech and cephalic-delivered neonates (35.6-8.6%). This difference tended to decrease in next phases (13.6-1% in Phase 2, 2.5-0% in Phase 3 and 1.7-0% in Phase 4). A significant difference (at the 5% level) for cephalic-delivered neonates was also observed between Phase 1 and Phase 4 (8.5-0%), but the percentages were low. Additionally, the breech-delivered had extreme difference in incidence of DDH from Phase 1 to Phase 4 (35.6-11.9%, 2.5%, and 1.7%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

It appears that there is an actual difference in the incidence of DDH between breech-delivered and cephalic-delivered neonates, although the difference may be less significant than previously considered. The majority of the breech-delivered neonates that were initially considered as pathological (Phase 1) are, in fact, healthy. This is ascertained in subsequent ultrasound examinations conducted in later phases (Phases 2-4), when the incidence of pathological cases decreases. This could be attributed to potential different maturation pattern between these groups.

Ultrasonographic screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip: the Graf method revisited

Until the 1980s, the diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) was based on clinical examination and radiographic imaging. In 1980, Reinhard Graf developed his own ultrasonographic method for the examination of the infant hip joint. Graf's method evaluates the osseous and cartilaginous coverage of the femoral head by the acetabulum in the infantile hip joint by measuring the angles α and β. The validity of Graf method is that with these measurements the hip joint is further classified by Graf classification into types I to IV that guide treatment. Currently, Graf method is considered the gold standard examination for the diagnosis of DDH in many European countries. This review article aims to discuss the incidence, risk factors and pathophysiology of DDH, and to emphasize on the Graf method for the evaluation, classification, prevention and further management of this entity.

Characterizing and quantifying low-value diagnostic imaging internationally: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources is a common problem, constituting 10-34% of health services spending in the western world. Even though diagnostic imaging is vital for identifying correct diagnoses and administrating the right treatment, low-value imaging-in which the diagnostic test confers little to no clinical benefit-is common and contributes to inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources. There is a lack of knowledge on the types and extent of low-value imaging. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to identify, characterize, and quantify the extent of low-value diagnostic imaging examinations for adults and children.

METHODS

A scoping review of the published literature was performed. Medline-Ovid, Embase-Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published from 2010 to September 2020. The search strategy was built from medical subject headings (Mesh) for Diagnostic imaging/Radiology OR Health service misuse/Medical overuse OR Procedures and Techniques Utilization/Facilities and Services Utilization. Articles in English, German, Dutch, Swedish, Danish, or Norwegian were included.

RESULTS

A total of 39,986 records were identified and, of these, 370 studies were included in the final synthesis. Eighty-four low-value imaging examinations were identified. Imaging of atraumatic pain, routine imaging in minor head injury, trauma, thrombosis, urolithiasis, after thoracic interventions, fracture follow-up and cancer staging/follow-up were the most frequently identified low-value imaging examinations. The proportion of low-value imaging varied between 2 and 100% inappropriate or unnecessary examinations.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive list of identified low-value radiological examinations for both adults and children are presented. Future research should focus on reasons for low-value imaging utilization and interventions to reduce the use of low-value imaging internationally.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42020208072.

A normal screening ultrasound does not provide complete reassurance in infants at risk of hip dysplasia; further follow-up is required

BACKGROUND

Screening for developmental hip dysplasia (DDH) continues to evolve with the use of ultrasound (US) in either selective or universal screening methods. The possibility of delayed evidence of DDH, and thus the need for radiographic follow-up at a later stage of development have been suggested by some authors.

AIMS

The aim of this review was to evaluate the number of patients in our hospital network with a normal screening US at 6 weeks with evidence of DDH at the time of radiographic review at 6 months. Secondary aim; to determine the outcomes for these patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review was done to infants undergoing DDH ultrasound screening between January and December 2015. Initial US and radiographs at 6 months were reviewed. Patients with normal screening US who had subsequent radiographs were included for analysis.

RESULTS

In total, there were 829 patients included for analysis. Sixty-three patients (8%) had evidence of DDH at 6 months, representing 34% of all DDH diagnoses for the study period. Five of the 63 patients were lost to follow-up. The remaining 58 babies were treated in Boston bracing. Four patients with evidence of persistent DDH were referred for tertiary review. The osteotomy rate in the radiograph diagnosed group was 2%, versus 6% and 3% in the unstable and US diagnosed groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Eight percent of patients with a normal screening US had evidence of DDH at time of radiograph at 6 months, reflecting 34% of all our DDH cases for the year. Based on these findings, patients in our hospital network undergo radiographic evaluation at 6 months even if the initial screening US is normal.

Correlations between ultrasonographic and subsequent radiographic findings of developmental dysplasia of the hips

Purpose

The study aimed to investigate the utility of ultrasonographic (US) findings in predicting the subsequent radiographic parameters of developmental dysplasia of the hips.

Methods

In this 12-year retrospective cohort study, all new-born infants with a positive clinical examination or risk factors were included. They were scheduled for hip ultrasonography in the first 3 months, and subsequent radiographs at 1 year of life. The US images were evaluated using the Graf classification, Harcke’s dynamic screening method, and Terjesen’s femoral head coverage method. The radiographic images were evaluated using the acetabular index and femoral head position. The overall US or radiographic findings were considered abnormal if they were classified as abnormal for any of their respective parameters. The overall US and radiographic parameters were correlated.

Results

A total of 160 patients were included. The overall US and radiographic parameters showed no statistically significant difference (P=0.050). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the overall US parameters were 57.1%, 84.9%, and 81.3%, respectively. All three individual US parameters showed no statistically significant differences, with the overall radiographic findings and acetabular index (P>0.05). However, they showed a statistically significant difference, with the position of the femoral head (P<0.001), with the US parameters having an excellent negative predictive value of 100% for identifying an abnormal femoral head position.

Conclusion

The current study suggests that US findings evaluated in the first 3 months of life showed no statistically significant difference with radiographic findings evaluated at 1 year of life. The US parameters showed an excellent negative predictive value for abnormal femoral head position on radiographs.