z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Gonadal shield: Is it the Albatross hanging around the neck of developmental dysplasia of the hip research?
Author(s) -
Akhilesh Kumar,
WaiWang Chau,
Alec Lik-Hang Hung,
J. K.-T. Wong,
Benjamin Ng,
Jack C. Y. Cheng
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of children's orthopaedics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.638
H-Index - 36
eISSN - 1863-2548
pISSN - 1863-2521
DOI - 10.1302/1863-2548.12.180133
Subject(s) - pelvis , medicine , radiography , dysplasia , female pelvis , radiological weapon , radiology
Purpose Prospective randomized controlled trials and long-term studies are essential future directions for building evidence-based practices in developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), however, sufficient attrition in data (> 20%) can introduce bias deteriorating research quality. Pelvic radiography is synonymous with DDH assessment and so are Gonadal Shield (GS) recommendations with pelvic radiography. Nonetheless, losses to diagnostic information and inadequate protection have been increasingly implicated to GS usage, with significantly worse implications in female patients. Understandably for DDH, a disease with 80% female prevalence, the impact of GS usage on quality of radiographs and readability of radiological data may be drastic. This study aims to objectively define the implications of GS recommendations in DDH patients.Methods Pelvis radiographs of all DDH patients under the hip surveillance programme at a tertiary care hospital with a written protocol for GS usage were evaluated. Images were reviewed for gender, GS presence, adequate gonadal protection and obstruction of essential anatomical landmarks for pelvic indices.Results In all, 131 pelvis radiographs with DDH diagnoses (age: 1.25 to 6 years; 107 female, 24 male pelvises) were reviewed. Only 42.67% (56) of pelvis radiographs used GS despite the presence of a clear protocol. Useful anatomical landmarks were obstructed in 58.9% of radiographs with GS present. Lost diagnostic information was more common in female patients than male patients (68.1% versus 11.1%, p < 0.01). GS was ineffective at gonadal protection in 73.2% (41) of the pelvises with worse protection in female patients (78.7% vs 44.4%; p = 0.03).Conclusions Ironically, essential anatomy was obstructed in all the adequately protected female pelvises. Routine GS usage results in substantial attrition of radiographic data in DDH patients.Level of Evidence III

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here