Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study
Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Ross, James R. [verfasserIn] Larson, Christopher M. [verfasserIn] Adeoyo, Olusanjo [verfasserIn] Kelly, Bryan T. [verfasserIn] Bedi, Asheesh [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2014 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Clinical orthopaedics and related research - Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963, 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:473 ; year:2014 ; number:4 ; day:05 ; month:12 ; pages:1388-1395 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR023798343 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR023798343 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230520001522.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201006s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR023798343 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q ASE |
| 084 | |a 44.83 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Ross, James R. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2014 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Alpha Angle |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Residual Deformity |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Acetabular Version |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Maximum Alpha Angle |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Larson, Christopher M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Adeoyo, Olusanjo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kelly, Bryan T. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bedi, Asheesh |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical orthopaedics and related research |d Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963 |g 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 |w (DE-627)316019062 |w (DE-600)2018318-5 |x 1528-1132 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:473 |g year:2014 |g number:4 |g day:05 |g month:12 |g pages:1388-1395 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2070 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2086 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2116 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2119 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2144 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4328 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.83 |q ASE |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 473 |j 2014 |e 4 |b 05 |c 12 |h 1388-1395 | ||
| author_variant |
j r r jr jrr c m l cm cml o a oa b t k bt btk a b ab |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:15281132:2014----::eiuleomtiteotomnesnorvsohprhocp |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2014 |
| bklnumber |
44.83 |
| publishDate |
2014 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 doi (DE-627)SPR023798343 (SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.83 bkl Ross, James R. verfasserin aut Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual Deformity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabular Version (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Larson, Christopher M. verfasserin aut Adeoyo, Olusanjo verfasserin aut Kelly, Bryan T. verfasserin aut Bedi, Asheesh verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical orthopaedics and related research Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 (DE-627)316019062 (DE-600)2018318-5 1528-1132 nnns volume:473 year:2014 number:4 day:05 month:12 pages:1388-1395 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.83 ASE AR 473 2014 4 05 12 1388-1395 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 doi (DE-627)SPR023798343 (SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.83 bkl Ross, James R. verfasserin aut Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual Deformity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabular Version (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Larson, Christopher M. verfasserin aut Adeoyo, Olusanjo verfasserin aut Kelly, Bryan T. verfasserin aut Bedi, Asheesh verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical orthopaedics and related research Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 (DE-627)316019062 (DE-600)2018318-5 1528-1132 nnns volume:473 year:2014 number:4 day:05 month:12 pages:1388-1395 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.83 ASE AR 473 2014 4 05 12 1388-1395 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 doi (DE-627)SPR023798343 (SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.83 bkl Ross, James R. verfasserin aut Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual Deformity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabular Version (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Larson, Christopher M. verfasserin aut Adeoyo, Olusanjo verfasserin aut Kelly, Bryan T. verfasserin aut Bedi, Asheesh verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical orthopaedics and related research Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 (DE-627)316019062 (DE-600)2018318-5 1528-1132 nnns volume:473 year:2014 number:4 day:05 month:12 pages:1388-1395 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.83 ASE AR 473 2014 4 05 12 1388-1395 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 doi (DE-627)SPR023798343 (SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.83 bkl Ross, James R. verfasserin aut Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual Deformity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabular Version (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Larson, Christopher M. verfasserin aut Adeoyo, Olusanjo verfasserin aut Kelly, Bryan T. verfasserin aut Bedi, Asheesh verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical orthopaedics and related research Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 (DE-627)316019062 (DE-600)2018318-5 1528-1132 nnns volume:473 year:2014 number:4 day:05 month:12 pages:1388-1395 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.83 ASE AR 473 2014 4 05 12 1388-1395 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 doi (DE-627)SPR023798343 (SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.83 bkl Ross, James R. verfasserin aut Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study 2014 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual Deformity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabular Version (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Larson, Christopher M. verfasserin aut Adeoyo, Olusanjo verfasserin aut Kelly, Bryan T. verfasserin aut Bedi, Asheesh verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical orthopaedics and related research Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 (DE-627)316019062 (DE-600)2018318-5 1528-1132 nnns volume:473 year:2014 number:4 day:05 month:12 pages:1388-1395 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.83 ASE AR 473 2014 4 05 12 1388-1395 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Clinical orthopaedics and related research 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 volume:473 year:2014 number:4 day:05 month:12 pages:1388-1395 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Clinical orthopaedics and related research 473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395 volume:473 year:2014 number:4 day:05 month:12 pages:1388-1395 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Alpha Angle Residual Deformity Acetabular Version Maximum Alpha Angle |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Clinical orthopaedics and related research |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Ross, James R. @@aut@@ Larson, Christopher M. @@aut@@ Adeoyo, Olusanjo @@aut@@ Kelly, Bryan T. @@aut@@ Bedi, Asheesh @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2014-12-05T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
316019062 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
SPR023798343 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR023798343</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230520001522.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201006s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR023798343</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.83</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ross, James R.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Alpha Angle</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Residual Deformity</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Acetabular Version</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Maximum Alpha Angle</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Larson, Christopher M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Adeoyo, Olusanjo</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kelly, Bryan T.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bedi, Asheesh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical orthopaedics and related research</subfield><subfield code="d">Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963</subfield><subfield code="g">473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)316019062</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2018318-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1528-1132</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:473</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2014</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">day:05</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1388-1395</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.83</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">473</subfield><subfield code="j">2014</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="b">05</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield><subfield code="h">1388-1395</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Ross, James R. |
| spellingShingle |
Ross, James R. ddc 610 bkl 44.83 misc Alpha Angle misc Residual Deformity misc Acetabular Version misc Maximum Alpha Angle Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study |
| authorStr |
Ross, James R. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)316019062 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1528-1132 |
| topic_title |
610 ASE 44.83 bkl Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual Deformity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabular Version (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maximum Alpha Angle (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.83 misc Alpha Angle misc Residual Deformity misc Acetabular Version misc Maximum Alpha Angle |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.83 misc Alpha Angle misc Residual Deformity misc Acetabular Version misc Maximum Alpha Angle |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.83 misc Alpha Angle misc Residual Deformity misc Acetabular Version misc Maximum Alpha Angle |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Clinical orthopaedics and related research |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
316019062 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Clinical orthopaedics and related research |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)316019062 (DE-600)2018318-5 |
| title |
Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR023798343 (SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e |
| title_full |
Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study |
| author_sort |
Ross, James R. |
| journal |
Clinical orthopaedics and related research |
| journalStr |
Clinical orthopaedics and related research |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2014 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
1388 |
| author_browse |
Ross, James R. Larson, Christopher M. Adeoyo, Olusanjo Kelly, Bryan T. Bedi, Asheesh |
| container_volume |
473 |
| class |
610 ASE 44.83 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Ross, James R. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 |
| dewey-full |
610 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
residual deformity is the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy: a three-dimensional ct study |
| title_auth |
Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study |
| abstract |
Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. |
| abstractGer |
Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| container_issue |
4 |
| title_short |
Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Larson, Christopher M. Adeoyo, Olusanjo Kelly, Bryan T. Bedi, Asheesh |
| author2Str |
Larson, Christopher M. Adeoyo, Olusanjo Kelly, Bryan T. Bedi, Asheesh |
| ppnlink |
316019062 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T21:26:51.486Z |
| _version_ |
1803594772256915456 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR023798343</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230520001522.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201006s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR023798343</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s11999-014-4069-9-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.83</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ross, James R.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Residual Deformity Is the Most Common Reason for Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Three-dimensional CT Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16–52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant. Results Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o’clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001). Conclusions We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective study, case series.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Alpha Angle</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Residual Deformity</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Acetabular Version</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Maximum Alpha Angle</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Larson, Christopher M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Adeoyo, Olusanjo</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kelly, Bryan T.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bedi, Asheesh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical orthopaedics and related research</subfield><subfield code="d">Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer Health, 1963</subfield><subfield code="g">473(2014), 4 vom: 05. Dez., Seite 1388-1395</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)316019062</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2018318-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1528-1132</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:473</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2014</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">day:05</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1388-1395</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.83</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">473</subfield><subfield code="j">2014</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="b">05</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield><subfield code="h">1388-1395</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3987713 |