Paediatrics

DDH Open Reduction (Medial & Anterior Approaches)

Surgical technique guide for open reduction of developmental dysplasia of the hip in infants and young children - medial (Ludloff/Ferguson) versus anterior (Smith-Petersen/bikini) approach selection, obstacles to reduction, capsulorrhaphy, concurrent femoral and pelvic osteotomy, spica casting and avascular necrosis

Core Procedure
advanced
By OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team

Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow β€’ Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

High-yield overview

Open reduction of the dysplastic hip when closed reduction fails or the child presents late β€” remove the obstacles, achieve a concentric reduction, hold in the human position, avoid AVN | advanced

Surgical Imaging

Obstacles to reduction in a dislocated dysplastic hip
Obstacles to reduction in a dislocated dysplastic hip: an inverted limbus, a hypertrophied pulvinar and ligamentum teres filling the true acetabulum, and an iliopsoas-induced hourglass capsular constriction β€” all must be cleared at open reduction.Credit: AI-generated medical image Β· OrthoVellum
Anterior versus medial approach for open reduction of DDH
Open-reduction approaches: the anterior (Smith-Petersen / bikini) interval between sartorius and tensor fascia lata, versus the medial (Ludloff) interval β€” which risks the medial femoral circumflex artery supplying the femoral head.Credit: AI-generated medical image Β· OrthoVellum
Hip spica in the safe human position after reduction
Concentric reduction held in a hip spica in the safe β€˜human’ position (moderate flexion and abduction) β€” avoiding the extreme abduction/internal rotation that causes avascular necrosis.Credit: AI-generated medical image Β· OrthoVellum

Critical Danger Structures and Exam Traps

Avascular Necrosis (AVN)

The trap: AVN is the most feared complication and is largely IATROGENIC. It results from excessive pressure on the reduced head, forced abduction (extreme frog-leg/Lorenz position), and compromise of the medial femoral circumflex artery.

The fix: Achieve a tension-free reduction (add femoral shortening if the head sits proximal/tight), immobilise in the SAFE HUMAN position (~100 degrees flexion, ~40-50 degrees abduction, neutral rotation), and avoid the extreme abducted frog-leg cast.

Medial Femoral Circumflex Artery (MFCA)

Location: In the medial (Ludloff) approach the MFCA runs between pectineus and iliopsoas, close to the lesser trochanter and the inferomedial capsule β€” directly in the operative interval.

Risk: Direct injury or traction on the MFCA in the medial approach is a recognised cause of AVN. Stay on the iliopsoas tendon, divide it at the lesser trochanter under vision, and avoid blind deep retraction medially.

Inverted Limbus / Labrum

The trap: A chronically dislocated head infolds the labrum (the "inverted limbus") into the acetabulum, physically blocking reduction. Forcing the head against an inverted limbus damages the head and causes a non-concentric reduction.

The fix: Identify the inverted limbus, evert or radially incise it. Do NOT excise the labrum wholesale β€” it contributes to acetabular development and stability.

Iliopsoas Tendon

Location: The iliopsoas crosses anterior to the capsule and, with chronic dislocation, indents the capsule producing the hourglass/figure-of-eight constriction that traps the head superiorly.

Action: Recess or release the iliopsoas tendon at the lesser trochanter (the principal target of the medial approach) to relieve the extra-articular constriction and allow the head to drop into the acetabulum.

Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve (Anterior approach)

Location: The LFCN lies near the anterior superior iliac spine in the Smith-Petersen interval, emerging medial to the ASIS deep to the inguinal ligament.

Risk: Injury or traction causes meralgia paraesthetica (anterolateral thigh numbness/dysaesthesia). Develop the interval slightly lateral and protect/retract the nerve; warn parents pre-operatively.

Pulvinar & Transverse Acetabular Ligament

The trap: Fibrofatty pulvinar fills the depth of the false acetabulum and a hypertrophied TAL tightens the inferior rim β€” together they prevent the head seating medially, leaving a widened medial joint space on post-op imaging.

The fix: Clear the pulvinar from the true acetabulum and divide the hypertrophied TAL (and ligamentum teres) to open the inferomedial entrance and allow a concentric reduction.

Mnemonic

T.I.P.T.O.PTIP-TOP β€” Obstacles to Reduction in DDH

Mnemonic

S.A.F.ESAFE β€” Holding the Reduction Without Causing AVN

Surgical Indications

Open reduction is required when a concentric, stable reduction of the dislocated hip cannot be achieved or maintained by non-operative (closed) means, or when the child presents too late for those methods to succeed.

Principal Indications

  • Failed Pavlik harness in the infant (persistent dislocation after ~3 weeks of harness, or the "Pavlik harness disease" of a posteriorly subluxed femoral head eroding the posterior acetabulum β€” abandon the harness)
  • Failed closed reduction under anaesthesia β€” irreducible hip, or reducible only in an unsafe (extreme/forced) position outside the safe zone of Ramsey
  • Unstable or non-concentric closed reduction β€” arthrogram shows excessive medial dye pool (greater than the contralateral side) indicating interposed soft tissue
  • Late-presenting DDH β€” the walking child or any child presenting beyond the age at which closed methods reliably succeed (commonly cited beyond 18-24 months)
  • Teratologic / syndromic dislocation β€” fixed antenatal dislocations (e.g. arthrogryposis, myelomeningocele) that are irreducible closed

Age-Based Strategy (a classic exam framework)

  • 0-6 months: Pavlik harness (closed, dynamic). Open reduction rarely needed.
  • 6-18 months: Closed reduction + arthrogram + spica under anaesthesia; if it fails or is non-concentric, OPEN reduction β€” medial approach is an option in this window.
  • 18 months - 2/3 years: Open reduction, generally via the anterior approach (allows capsulorrhaphy Β± pelvic osteotomy).
  • Older than 2-3 years: Open reduction via the anterior approach + femoral shortening/derotation osteotomy and frequently a pelvic (Salter) osteotomy to address the dysplastic, anteverted, shallow acetabulum.

Contraindications / Cautions

Relative:

  • A hip that achieves a safe, concentric, stable CLOSED reduction β€” do not open it
  • The very high, long-standing bilateral dislocation in an older child where surgery may worsen function (individualised decision; some advocate leaving a painless bilateral dislocation)
  • Active local infection; unfit for anaesthesia

Evidence and Principles

Why the head will not reduce β€” the obstacles

The literature (classically Salter, Tachdjian, and others) divides the obstacles into extra-articular (tight iliopsoas producing the hourglass capsular constriction; a contracted hip adductor mass) and intra-articular (inverted limbus/labrum, hypertrophied ligamentum teres, pulvinar, hypertrophied transverse acetabular ligament, and the redundant/constricted capsule). A concentric reduction is impossible until each relevant obstacle is dealt with.

The role of femoral shortening (rather than traction)

  • Historically, pre-operative skin/skeletal traction was used to bring the head down to the level of the acetabulum and was believed to reduce AVN β€” modern evidence does NOT support routine traction as protective.
  • Primary femoral shortening osteotomy has largely replaced traction in the older child: it decompresses the reduction, allows correction of femoral anteversion (derotation) and coxa valga (varus), and is associated with LOWER AVN rates than forcing a tense reduction.

Pelvic osteotomy as an adjunct

  • In the older child the acetabulum is shallow and antero-laterally deficient. A redirectional Salter innominate osteotomy (or Pemberton/Dega acetabuloplasty) is added to provide anterolateral coverage and correct residual dysplasia once a concentric reduction is achieved.

Medial vs Anterior Open Reduction β€” Selection and Evidence


Key Evidence

Is Age or Surgical Approach Associated With Osteonecrosis in DDH? A Meta-analysis

Level III (Meta-analysis of observational studies)
Novais EN, Hill MK, Carry PM, Heyn PC β€’ Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (2016)
Clinical Implication: The choice between medial and anterior open reduction can be made on surgeon preference and the need for capsulorrhaphy/pelvic osteotomy rather than on AVN risk β€” the MFCA argument for the medial approach is anatomical, not borne out in pooled outcomes. Do NOT deliberately delay reduction to 'protect' the head.

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Open Reduction Using the Anterior versus Medial Approaches for DDH

Level III (Comparative cohort)
Ergin ON, Demirel M, Meric E, Sensoy V, Bilgili F β€’ Indian Journal of Orthopaedics (2021)
Clinical Implication: Reinforces that medial and anterior open reduction give comparable mid- to long-term clinical, radiographic and AVN outcomes in the under-24-month hip; approach selection should hinge on whether capsulorrhaphy or a concurrent pelvic osteotomy is needed.

Proximal versus Distal Tenotomy of the Iliopsoas Tendon in the Surgical Treatment of DDH

Level I (Randomized controlled trial)
Doski J β€’ International Orthopaedics (2025)
Clinical Implication: When releasing the iliopsoas during open reduction, dividing the tendon proximally at the pelvic brim may protect the medial femoral circumflex vessels and preserve flexion strength compared with a release at the lesser trochanter β€” directly relevant to the MFCA danger zone.

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Stiffness Following Open Reduction for DDH

Level IV (Retrospective cohort)
Desai VM, Hall CE, Cardin S, DeFrancesco CJ, Sarkar S, Sankar WN β€’ Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics (2024)
Clinical Implication: In the older child or high dislocation, adding a femoral shortening osteotomy (rather than relying on a pelvic osteotomy alone to accommodate a tense reduction) reduces tension and the risk of postoperative stiffness; counsel families that arthrofibrosis affects roughly a third of hips.

Mid-term Results of Pemberton Pericapsular Osteotomy for DDH

Level IV (Retrospective cohort)
Balioglu MB, Oner A, Aykut US, Kaygusuz MA β€’ Indian Journal of Orthopaedics (2015)
Clinical Implication: Acetabuloplasty (Pemberton/Dega), which hinges on the triradiate cartilage to reshape the roof, durably corrects the acetabular index in the older dysplastic hip and combines well with open reduction and femoral shortening in a single stage.

Clinical Decision Scenarios

Use these scenarios to practise clinical reasoning and management decisions

CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

CLINICAL PROMPT

"An 11-month-old girl has a left hip that failed Pavlik harness treatment. Under anaesthesia you perform an arthrogram and the hip does not reduce concentrically β€” there is an excessive medial dye pool. Talk me through how you would proceed and which approach you would choose."

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This is an irreducible/non-concentric hip in a young child, so I would proceed to open reduction. The excessive medial dye pool tells me there is interposed soft tissue β€” typically pulvinar, an inverted limbus, a hypertrophied ligamentum teres and a tight transverse acetabular ligament β€” and an extra-articular block from the iliopsoas producing the hourglass capsular constriction. **Approach choice**: At 11 months, with no need for an acetabular procedure and a relatively simple reduction, a **medial (Ludloff) approach** is very reasonable. It gives a direct route to exactly the obstacles I need to clear β€” the iliopsoas at the lesser trochanter, the ligamentum teres, the pulvinar and the TAL. I would counsel the family specifically about avascular necrosis, which is the principal risk, partly because the medial femoral circumflex artery lies in the operative interval. **Technique**: Adductor longus tenotomy, develop the interval, release/recess the iliopsoas at the lesser trochanter to relieve the constriction. Open the inferomedial capsule, excise the ligamentum teres down to the true floor, clear the pulvinar, divide the hypertrophied TAL and evert the inverted limbus. I then reduce the head and confirm a concentric, stable reduction. **Holding it**: I apply a hip spica in the SAFE human position β€” about 100 degrees of flexion and only moderate (40-50 degrees) abduction, neutral rotation. I specifically avoid the extreme frog-leg position because that is what compromises the head's blood supply. I confirm the reduction with a post-operative CT or limited MRI through the cast, looking carefully for posterior redislocation. **If the head were too proximal/tense** (more relevant in an older child), I would add a femoral shortening osteotomy rather than force the reduction.
CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

CLINICAL PROMPT

"A 3-year-old boy presents with a high, long-standing left hip dislocation that was never treated. He walks with a Trendelenburg gait and apparent shortening. How does your surgical plan differ from that of a 1-year-old, and why?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
The older child with a high, long-standing dislocation needs a more extensive, combined procedure because the pathology is more advanced and a simple reduction would be under dangerous tension. **Approach**: I would use the **anterior (Smith-Petersen / bikini) approach**, not the medial approach. At this age I need to do a capsulorrhaphy and almost certainly a pelvic osteotomy, and the anterior approach gives me the anterior capsule, the iliopsoas, and the lateral ilium all through one incision. **Why the head will not simply reduce**: The head sits high and the soft tissues are contracted, so a forced reduction would put the femoral head under high pressure β€” the recipe for AVN. Therefore I plan a **femoral shortening osteotomy** (subtrochanteric), also correcting the excessive anteversion (derotation) and any valgus. This decompresses the joint and is the modern alternative to pre-operative traction, with lower AVN rates. **Sequence**: Protect the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve, split the iliac apophysis, do an iliopsoas tenotomy and a T-capsulotomy. Clear the obstacles β€” ligamentum teres, pulvinar, TAL, inverted limbus. Reduce; if tense, complete the femoral shortening/derotation and fix with a plate. Because the acetabulum is shallow and anterolaterally deficient, I add a **Salter innominate osteotomy** for coverage. Finally I perform a **capsulorrhaphy** to reinforce the reduction. **Holding and follow-up**: Hip spica in the human position, post-op CT/MRI to confirm concentricity, then serial radiographs to skeletal maturity to watch for AVN and residual dysplasia. **Counselling**: AVN and residual dysplasia risks are higher at this age than in an infant β€” the family must understand that further surgery may be needed.
CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

CLINICAL PROMPT

"Six months after an open reduction and spica for DDH, the post-cast radiograph shows a fragmented, poorly ossified femoral head. The parents ask what has happened. How do you explain and manage avascular necrosis in this setting?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This appearance is consistent with avascular necrosis of the femoral head β€” the most feared complication of DDH treatment. I would explain to the parents that the blood supply to the developing head has been compromised, the bone has temporarily lost its blood supply and is being remodelled, which on X-ray looks fragmented and poorly ossified. **Why it happens**: AVN here is largely iatrogenic. The main mechanisms are excessive pressure on the reduced head, immobilisation in an extreme abducted (frog-leg) position which kinks the medial femoral circumflex artery, and direct vascular injury β€” particularly relevant if a medial approach was used, where the MFCA lies in the operative interval. **Assessment**: I would grade it (Kalamchi-MacEwen classification β€” from minor physeal changes to total head involvement with growth arrest) and follow it with serial radiographs. I would assess the current reduction (is the head still concentric?), the acetabular development, and the child's symptoms and gait. **Management**: There is no way to reverse established AVN. Management is supportive and aimed at maintaining a concentric, contained head while it remodels β€” protected activity, observation, and treating the consequences as they declare: - If the head remains concentric and contained, observe with serial imaging. - Growth disturbance may produce **coxa magna, coxa breva, coxa vara, trochanteric overgrowth or limb-length discrepancy** β€” managed later with guided growth, corrective/varus or trochanteric-advancement osteotomy, or epiphysiodesis as needed. - If containment is lost, a **containment procedure** (femoral or pelvic osteotomy) may be required. **Honesty with the family**: I would be candid that AVN is a recognised risk we counsel about pre-operatively, that we will follow him closely to skeletal maturity, and that further surgery may be needed to optimise the long-term result.

DDH Open Reduction (Medial & Anterior) β€” Exam Day Summary

Clinical summary

References

  1. Salter RB (1961). Innominate osteotomy in the treatment of congenital dislocation and subluxation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. β€” Foundational description of the innominate (Salter) osteotomy and principles of concentric reduction in DDH.

  2. Ludloff K (1908/1913). The open reduction of the congenital hip dislocation by an anterior incision (medial approach). β€” Original description of the medial approach to open reduction.

  3. Ferguson AB Jr (1973). Primary open reduction of congenital dislocation of the hip using a median adductor approach. J Bone Joint Surg Am 55(4):671-689. β€” Original description of the medial (adductor) approach and its outcomes.

  4. Kalamchi A, MacEwen GD (1980). Avascular necrosis following treatment of congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 62(6):876-888. β€” The widely used radiographic classification of AVN/growth disturbance after DDH treatment.

  5. Tachdjian MO. Pediatric Orthopaedics β€” standard textbook reference for the obstacles to reduction and the surgical approaches to DDH.

  6. Novais EN, Hill MK, Carry PM, Heyn PC (2016). Is age or surgical approach associated with osteonecrosis in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip? A meta-analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 474(5):1166-1177. PMID 26472583. β€” Meta-analysis showing no difference in AVN between medial and anterior approaches or by age at reduction.

  7. Ergin ON, Demirel M, Meric E, Sensoy V, Bilgili F (2021). A comparative study of clinical and radiological outcomes of open reduction using the anterior and medial approaches for DDH. Indian J Orthop 55(1):130-141. PMID 33569107. β€” Mid- to long-term comparison of anterior vs medial open reduction.

  8. Doski J (2025). Proximal versus distal tenotomy of the iliopsoas tendon in the surgical treatment of DDH: a randomized clinical trial. Int Orthop 49(3):581-588. PMID 39853427. β€” RCT favouring proximal (brim) iliopsoas release for fewer MFCA injuries and AVN.

  9. Desai VM, Hall CE, Cardin S, et al. (2024). Prevalence and risk factors for stiffness following open reduction for DDH. J Pediatr Orthop 44(10):e908-e914. PMID 39021118. β€” Identifies older age, high dislocation and pelvic osteotomy without femoral shortening as stiffness risk factors.

  10. Balioglu MB, Oner A, Aykut US, Kaygusuz MA (2015). Mid-term results of Pemberton pericapsular osteotomy. Indian J Orthop 49(4):418-424. PMID 26229162. β€” Durable acetabular index correction with acetabuloplasty for the older dysplastic hip.