Hip arthroscopy and T-shaped capsular plication for the treatment of borderline dysplasia: a minimum 2-year follow-up

Background: Hip arthroscopy for the treatment of instability in the setting of borderline dysplasia is controversial. Capsular management in such cases is an important consideration, and plication has been described as a reliable technique, with good midterm outcomes reported when indications are appropriate. Hypothesis: Patients with borderline dysplasia who have a lower lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) and greater age will be at a higher risk of failure after arthroscopic capsular plication. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were retrospectively reviewed for all patients between 15 and 40 years of age who underwent hip arthroscopy from November 2008 to January 2015. Inclusion criteria were an LCEA between 18° and 25°, Tönnis grade ≤1, primary case with capsular plication, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were excluded if they had any history of ipsilateral hip procedure or conditions such as Legg-Calve-Perthes disease, slipped capital femoral epiphysis, rheumatologic disease, and Tönnis grade ≥2. Age, sex, and body mass index data were retrieved for each patient. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs)—including modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale, and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain (0-10)—were obtained preoperatively and at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively, in addition to the postoperative International Hip Outcome Tool–12. The “success” group consisted of all patients who achieved the patient acceptable symptomatic state of mHHS ≥74 and had no ipsilateral hip surgery subsequent to their index arthroscopy. The “failure” group was composed of patients who were below the patient acceptable symptomatic state at latest follow-up or required secondary arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Patient satisfaction and minimal clinically important difference were also calculated. Mean age for the failure group was applied as a cutoff age for subanalysis, and relative risk for failure was determined. Results: Ninety patients (97 hips; 79.5%) met criteria for the success group, and 25 patients (25 hips) met criteria for the failure group. No significant differences in preoperative baseline scores or VAS were found. However, there did appear to be a trend that the failure group had lower mean preoperative scores for all PRO measures and a higher VAS score. The differences in preoperative mHHS and NAHS closely approached significance ( P = .053). Postoperative PRO, VAS, and patient satisfaction scores of the success group were significantly higher than the failure group. The failure group was significantly older than the success group (28.5 ± 7.8 vs 23.5 ± 7.5 years, P = .005). Patients >35 years old were 2.25 times more likely to fail according to relative risk (95% CI, 1.10-4.60; P = .0266). LCEA did not differ between the groups, and no other risk factors for failure were identified. Conclusion: Stringent criteria for patient selection and meticulous repair or augmentation of the static stabilizers of the hip yielded favorable clinical outcomes in this study cohort with borderline dysplasia. Within this carefully selected group, the analysis revealed that increased age was the main risk factor for failure in the management of borderline hip dysplasia via isolated primary arthroscopic hip surgery with capsular plication.

Download Full-text

Predictors of Poor Clinical Outcome After Arthroscopic Labral Preservation, Capsular Plication, and Cam Osteoplasty in the Setting of Borderline Hip Dysplasia

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/0363546517730583 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 46 (1) ◽

pp. 135-143 ◽

Cited By ~ 45

Author(s):

Akihisa Hatakeyama ◽

Hajime Utsunomiya ◽

Shoichi Nishikino ◽

Shiho Kanezaki ◽

Dean K. Matsuda ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Hip Arthroscopy ◽

Harris Hip Score ◽

Failure Group ◽

Capsular Plication ◽

Chondral Damage ◽

Success Group ◽

Tönnis Grade

Background: Borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH) is frequently diagnosed concurrently with cam impingement. While hip arthroscopy has advanced the treatment of hip joint pathology, including femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), arthroscopic treatment for FAI in the setting of BDDH remains a challenge amid a subset of patients. The risk factors of poor clinical results after hip arthroscopic labral preservation and FAI corrections in the setting of BDDH patients have not been well established. Hypothesis: Pre- and intraoperative findings can predict the poor clinical outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI in the setting of BDDH. Study Design: Case control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Of patients with BDDH (defined as lateral center edge [LCE] angle between 20° and 25°) who underwent arthroscopic procedures for FAI between 2009 and 2014, 45 met inclusion criteria (45 hips: 15 males and 30 females). Their mean age was 31.4 years (range, 12-65 years), and the mean LCE angle was 23.2°. Clinical and radiographic follow-up evaluations up to a minimum of 2 years after surgery were performed for all patients. Failure of the procedure was defined as conversion to subsequent surgery or having a Tönnis osteoarthritis grade of 2, and success was defined as patients who did not need subsequent surgery. Univariate analysis and Cox hazard proportional analysis were performed for both cohorts. Results: Of 45 patients, 11 (24%) had revision surgery (endoscopic shelf acetabuloplasty for 5 patients, total hip arthroplasty for 2, and revision hip arthroscopy for 2) or advanced to Tönnis grade ≥2 osteoarthritis and thus constituted the failure group. In the success group, modified Harris Hip Score (median, pre- vs postoperative: 72.1 vs 100, P< .001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test) and nonarthritic hip score (58.8 vs 98.8, P< .001) were significantly improved at the minimum 2-year follow-up. The median age of the failure group was significantly higher than that of the success group (47.0 vs 20.0, P< .001, Mann-Whitney Utest). Risk factors of poor clinical outcomes were identified as follows: age ≥42 years (hazard ratio [HR], 11.6; 95% CI, 2.5-53.9; P= .002, Cox hazard model), broken Shenton line (HR, 6.4; 95% CI, 1.9-22.3; P= .003), Tönnis angle ≥15° (HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.2-12.9; P= .03), vertical center anterior (VCA) angle ≤17° (HR, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.5-17.1; P= .01), Tönnis grade 1 at preoperative radiograph (HR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1-11.7; P= .04), severe cartilage delamination at acetabulum (HR, 11.8; 95% CI, 3.0-46.1; P< .001), and mild cartilage damage at femoral head (HR, 8.1; 95% CI, 2.1-30.8; P= .002). Conclusion: Preoperative predictors of poorer outcomes from hip arthroscopic labral preservation, capsular plication, and cam osteoplasty in the setting of BDDH are age ≥42 years old, broken Shenton line, osteoarthritis, Tönnis angle ≥15°, and VCA angle ≤17° on preoperative radiographs. Intraoperative predictors of poorer outcomes are severe acetabular chondral damage and even mild femoral chondral damage. Although the patients in the setting of BDDH may have good outcomes from isolated hip arthroscopy, caution is suggested for those with the aforementioned risk factors.

Download Full-text

Capsular closure versus unrepaired interportal capsulotomy after hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement, results of a patient-blinded randomised controlled trial

Hip International ◽

10.1177/11207000211005762 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 112070002110057

Author(s):

Niels H Bech ◽

Inger N Sierevelt ◽

Sheryl de Waard ◽

Boudijn S H Joling ◽

Gino M M J Kerkhoffs ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽

Hip Arthroscopy ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Poor Quality ◽

Control Group ◽

Treatment Groups ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Randomised Controlled

Background: Hip capsular management after hip arthroscopy remains a topic of debate. Most available current literature is of poor quality and are retrospective or cohort studies. As of today, no clear consensus exists on capsular management after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of routine capsular closure versus unrepaired capsulotomy after interportal capsulotomy measured with NRS pain and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS). Materials and methods: All eligible patients with femoroacetabular impingement who opt for hip arthroscopy ( n = 116) were randomly assigned to one of both treatment groups and were operated by a single surgeon. Postoperative pain was measured with the NRS score weekly the first 12 weeks after surgery. The HAGOS questionnaire was measured at 12 and 52 weeks postoperatively. Results: Baseline characteristics and operation details were comparable between treatment groups. Regarding the NRS pain no significant difference was found between groups at any point the first 12 weeks after surgery ( p = 0.67). Both groups significantly improved after surgery ( p < 0.001). After 3 months follow-up there were no differences between groups for the HAGOS questionnaire except for the domain sport ( p = 0.02) in favour of the control group. After 12 months follow-up there were no differences between both treatment groups on all HAGOS domains ( p > 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this randomised controlled trial show highest possible evidence that there is no reason for routinely capsular closure after interportal capsulotomy at the end of hip arthroscopy. Trial Registration: This trial was registered at the CCMO Dutch Trial Register: NL55669.048.15.

Download Full-text

Hip Capsular Plication With Crossed Mattress Stitch Configuration for a Revision Hip Arthroscopy in the Setting of Capsular Insufficiency

Arthroscopy Techniques ◽

10.1016/j.eats.2021.04.020 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Robert B. Browning ◽

Thomas D. Alter ◽

Daniel Wichman ◽

Shane J. Nho

Keyword(s):

Hip Arthroscopy ◽

Capsular Plication

Download Full-text

Comparing Midterm Outcomes of High-Level Athletes Versus Nonathletes Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Propensity-Matched Comparison With Minimum 5-Year Follow-up

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/03635465211041763 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 036354652110417

Author(s):

Andrew E. Jimenez ◽

Peter F. Monahan ◽

David R. Maldonado ◽

Benjamin R. Saks ◽

Hari K. Ankem ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Hip Arthroscopy ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Arthroscopic Surgery ◽

Harris Hip Score ◽

Control Group ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome ◽

Patient Reported ◽

High Level

Background: High-level athletes (HLAs) have been shown to have better short-term outcomes than nonathletes (NAs) after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: (1) To report midterm outcomes of HLAs after primary hip arthroscopy and (2) to compare their results with a propensity-matched cohort of NA patients. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed between February 2008 and November 2015 for HLAs (professional, college, or high school) who underwent primary hip arthroscopy in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). HLAs were included if they had preoperative, minimum 2-year, and minimum 5-year follow-up data for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Hip Outcome Score Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS). Radiographic and intraoperative findings, surgical procedures, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and return to sport were reported. The HLA study group was propensity-matched to a control group of NA patients for comparison. Results: A total 65 HLA patients (67 hips) were included in the final analysis with mean follow-up time of 74.6 ± 16.7 months. HLAs showed significant improvement in all PROs recorded, achieved high rates of MCID and PASS for mHHS (74.6% and 79.4%, respectively) and HOS-SSS (67.7% and 66.1%, respectively), and returned to sport at high rates (80.4%). When compared with the propensity-matched NA control group, HLAs reported higher baseline but comparable postoperative scores for the mHHS and NAHS. HLA patients achieved MCID and PASS for mHHS at similar rates as NA patients, but the HLA patients achieved PASS for HOS-SSS at higher rates that trended toward statistical significance (66.1% vs 48.4%; P = .07). NA patients underwent revision arthroscopic surgery at similar rates as HLA patients (14.9% vs 9.0%, respectively; P = .424). Conclusion: Primary hip arthroscopy results in favorable midterm outcomes in HLAs. When compared with a propensity-matched NA control group, HLAs demonstrated a tendency toward higher rates of achieving PASS for HOS-SSS but similar arthroscopic revision rates at minimum 5-year follow-up.

Download Full-text

Criteria for Return to Play After Hip Arthroscopy in the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/03635465211038959 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 036354652110389

Author(s):

Martin S. Davey ◽

Eoghan T. Hurley ◽

Matthew G. Davey ◽

Jordan W. Fried ◽

Andrew J. Hughes ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽

Hip Arthroscopy ◽

Operative Management ◽

Return To Play ◽

Return To Sports ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

The Mean

Background: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a common pathology in athletes that often requires operative management in the form of hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To systematically review the rates and level of return to play (RTP) and the criteria used for RTP after hip arthroscopy for FAI in athletes. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of the literature, based on the PRISMA guidelines, was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. Studies reporting outcomes after the use of hip arthroscopy for FAI were included. Outcomes analyzed were RTP rate, RTP level, and criteria used for RTP. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software. Results: Our review found 130 studies, which included 14,069 patients (14,517 hips) and had a mean methodological quality of evidence (MQOE) of 40.4 (range, 5-67). The majority of patients were female (53.7%), the mean patient age was 30.4 years (range, 15-47 years), and the mean follow-up was 29.7 months (range, 6-75 months). A total of 81 studies reported RTP rates, with an overall RTP rate of 85.4% over a mean period of 6.6 months. Additionally, 49 studies reported the rate of RTP at preinjury level as 72.6%. Specific RTP criteria were reported in 97 studies (77.2%), with time being the most commonly reported item, which was reported in 80 studies (69.2%). A total of 45 studies (57.9%) advised RTP at 3 to 6 months after hip arthroscopy. Conclusion: The overall rate of reported RTP was high after hip arthroscopy for FAI. However, more than one-fourth of athletes who returned to sports did not return at their preinjury level. Development of validated rehabilitation criteria for safe return to sports after hip arthroscopy for FAI could potentially improve clinical outcomes while also increasing rates of RTP at preinjury levels.

Download Full-text

Arthroscopic Hip Surgery in the Elite Athlete: Comparison of Female and Male Elite Athletes

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/2325967117s00109 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 5 (3_suppl3) ◽

pp. 2325967117S0010

Author(s):

Kotaro Shibata ◽

Marc R. Safran

Keyword(s):

Hip Arthroscopy ◽

Elite Athletes ◽

Hip Surgery ◽

Return To Sports ◽

Competitive Sports ◽

Sports Activity ◽

Competitive Activity ◽

Sports Activities ◽

Athlete Group

Objectives: 1) To compare ability to return to prior competitive sports activity after arthroscopic hip surgery by gender, with an emphasis on the rate of return to the same level of competition. 2) To compare gender differences in type of sports activities, diagnosis and treatment in athletes requiring hip arthroscopy. Methods: Prospectively obtained data on all high-level elite athletes (professional, NCAA collegiate and/or Olympic) treated between 2007 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. The clinical and surgical records of 547 hips in 484 consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy by the senior author for non-arthritic hip pain during the study period were included. Elite athletes who had a Hip Sports Activity Score (HSAS) of over 6 were identified. Patients completed a pre-operative questionnaire that included medical and sports activity history and level of competition, hip-specific outcome scores (Modified Harris Hip Score [MHHS] and International Hip Outcome Tool-33 [iHOT-33]) at baseline and most recent follow-up. Surgical findings and time to return to competitive sports activity were documented. Results: A total of 98 elite athletes with a mean follow up period of 18.8 months (±12.7) were identified. There were 49 females and 49 males. 27 athletes had bilateral hip arthroscopy, 5 of which had 1 operation elsewhere. All patients were available for follow up. Of the 80 patients desiring to return to their original competitive activity, 38 were female (42 hips) (Female Athlete group [FA]) and 42 were male (54 hips) (Male Athlete group [MA]) their mean ages were 21.5(±3.9) and 20.5(±1.9), duration of pain prior to surgery was 12.1 (±10.3) months and 15.1 (±1.9) months, respectively. 84.2% of FA and 83.3% of MA were able to return to the same level of competition at a mean of 8.3 (±3) and 8.8 (±2.9) months, respectively. Statistically significant improvements between pre- and post-operative mean MHHS and iHOT-33 scores were seen in both groups (p <.0001; p <.0001). FA had significantly higher proportions of hips that were diagnosed with Pincer type FAI (p =.0004), and Instability (p <.0001). Conversely, the MA had significantly higher proportions of hips that were diagnosed with Combined type FAI (p <.0001), had more extensive acetabular cartilage rim damage (p =.0002), and in particularly had more hips that required microfracture treatment (p =.001). When comparing cam lesions (includes Cam and Combined type FAI) the alpha angle was statistically greater in MA (mean 74°±6.7) compared to FA (mean 65.4°±6.8) (p <.0001). The category of sports the FA participated in were more flexibility (11%) and endurance (24%) type sports. MA participated more in cutting (33%), contact (14%) and asymmetric (31%) type sports. Patients who were able to return to same level of competitive activity had a significantly shorter duration of pre-operation symptoms compared to those who could not (p < 0.05). Microfracture treatment did not affect the ability to return to sports. Conclusion: A similar high percentage of both female and male elite athletes were able to return to competitive sports activity after arthroscopic treatment of FAI and/or hip instability. Distinct differences in diagnosis, treatment and participating type of sports activities were seen when comparing female and male athletes. Duration of symptoms negatively correlated with outcomes. Extensive cartilage damage and Microfracture did not affect outcome / return to sports.

Download Full-text

In Revision Hip Arthroscopy, Labral Reconstruction Can Address a Deficient Labrum, but Labral Repair Retains Its Role for the Reparable Labrum: A Matched Control Study

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/0363546518809063 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 46 (14) ◽

pp. 3437-3445 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Itay Perets ◽

Danil Rybalko ◽

Brian H. Mu ◽

David R. Maldonado ◽

Gary Edwards ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Visual Analog Scale ◽

Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Hip Arthroscopy ◽

Labral Repair ◽

Acetabular Labrum ◽

Analog Scale ◽

Total Hip

Background: Revision hip arthroscopy is increasingly common and often addresses acetabular labrum pathology. There is a lack of consensus on indications or outcomes of revision labral repair versus reconstruction. Purpose: To report clinical outcomes of labral reconstruction during revision hip arthroscopy at minimum 2-year follow-up as compared with pair-matched labral repair during revision hip arthroscopy (control group) and to suggest a decision-making algorithm for labral treatment in revision hip arthroscopy. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy with labral reconstruction were matched 1:2 with patients who underwent revision arthroscopic labral repair. Patients were matched according to age, sex, and body mass index. Outcome scores, including the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale, and a visual analog scale for pain, were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up. At latest follow-up, patient satisfaction on a 0-10 scale and the abbreviated International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) were collected. Complications, subsequent arthroscopies, and conversion to total hip arthroplasty were collected as well. Results: A total of 15 revision labral reconstructions were pair matched to 30 revision labral repairs. The reconstructions had fewer isolated Seldes type I detachments ( P = .008) and lower postoperative lateral center-edge angle, but there were otherwise no significant differences in demographics, radiographics, intraoperative findings, or procedures. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in all outcomes and visual analog scale at minimum 2-year follow-up. The revision repairs trended toward better preoperative scores: mHHS (mean ± SD: 59.3 ± 16.5 vs 54.2 ± 16.0), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (61.0 ± 16.7 vs 51.2 ± 17.6), Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale (39.6 ± 25.1 vs 30.5 ± 22.1), and visual analog scale (5.8 ± 1.8 vs 6.2 ± 2.2). At follow-up, the revision repair group had significantly higher mHHS (84.1 ± 14.8 vs 72.0 ± 18.3, P = .043) and iHOT-12 (72.2 ± 23.3 vs 49.0 ± 27.6, P = .023) scores than the reconstruction group. The magnitudes of pre- to postoperative improvement between the groups were comparable. The groups also had comparable rates of complications: 1 case of numbness in each group ( P > .999), subsequent arthroscopies (repair: n = 2, 6.5%; revision: n = 3, 20%; P = .150), and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (1 patient in each group, P > .999). Conclusion: Labral reconstruction safely and effectively treats irreparable labra in revision hip arthroscopy. However, labral repair is another treatment option for reparable labra, yielding similar magnitude of improvement. A proposed algorithm may assist in surgical decision making to achieve optimal outcomes based on the condition and history of each patient’s acetabular labrum.

Download Full-text