The positive predictive value of asymmetrical skin creases in the diagnosis of pathological developmental dysplasia of the hip.

Aims: The aim of this study was to identify the association between asymmetrical skin creases of the thigh, buttock or inguinal region and pathological developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Patients and Methods: Between 1 January 1996 and 31 December 2016, all patients referred to our unit from primary or secondary care with risk factors for DDH were assessed in a "one stop" clinic. All had clinical and sonographic assessment by the senior author (RWP) with the results being recorded prospectively. The inclusion criteria for this study were babies and children referred with asymmetrical skin creases. Those with a neurological cause of DDH were excluded. The positive predictive value (PPV) for pathological DDH was calculated. Results: A total of 105 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 71 girls and 34 boys. Only two were found to have pathological DDH. Both also had unilateral limited abduction of the hip in flexion and a positive Galeazzi sign with apparent leg-length discrepancy. Thus, if the specialist examination of a patient with asymmetrical skin creases was normal, the PPV for DDH was 0%. Conclusion: Isolated asymmetrical skin creases are an unreliable clinical sign in the diagnosis of pathological DDH. Greater emphasis should be placed on the presence of additional clinical signs to guide radiological screening in babies and children. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:675-9.

Ankle injury manipulation before or after X-ray--does it influence success?

Many acute, deformed ankle injuries are manipulated in the Emergency Department (ED) before X-rays are taken to confirm the nature of the injury. This often occurs in the absence of neurovascular or skin compromise without consideration of other possible injuries such as talar, subtalar or calcaneal injuries. We believe that an inappropriate manipulation of an unknown injury pattern may place the patient at increased risk. A balance needs to be struck between making the correct diagnosis and preventing any further neurovascular or skin compromise. We prospectively reviewed 197 patients admitted to the Royal Blackburn Hospital with acute ankle injuries. Their ED notes were reviewed, specifically assessing whether a manipulation was performed; if so, was it performed before X-rays and the documented reasons. A total of 90 ankle fractures were manipulated and 31 of these were performed before X-ray. One manipulation was performed for vascular compromise, one for nerve symptoms, three for critical skin and 25 for undocumented reasons. Outcomes (re-manipulation, delay to surgery and need for open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF)) were compared between injuries manipulated before or after X-ray. Re-manipulation was found to be significant (44% before X-ray vs. 18% after X-ray; chi-squared test: p=0.03; relative risk (RR)=2.72; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-6.44). Delay to surgery and need for ORIF were not statistically different. We conclude that performing ankle injury X-rays before an attempt at manipulation, in the absence of neurovascular deficit or critical skin, may constitute best practice as it provides a better assessment of fracture configuration, guides initial reduction and significantly lowers the risk of re-manipulation and the potential risks associated with sedation without delaying surgery.