Clinical Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Matched-Pair Control Study With Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 434-442
Author(s):  
Lyall Ashberg ◽  
Leslie C. Yuen ◽  
Mary R. Close ◽  
Itay Perets ◽  
Mitchell R. Mohr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Control Study

Achieving Successful Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy in the Setting of Generalized Ligamentous Laxity With Labral Preservation and Appropriate Capsular Management: A Propensity Matched Controlled Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 1625-1635
Author(s):  
David R. Maldonado ◽  
Jeffery W. Chen ◽  
Mitchell J. Yelton ◽  
Philip J. Rosinsky ◽  
Jacob Shapira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Matched Pair ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Beighton Score ◽  
Ligamentous Laxity ◽  
Labral Tears

Background: Association among generalized ligamentous laxity (GLL), hip microinstability, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after hip arthroscopy has yet to be completely established. Purposes: (1) To report minimum 2-year PROs in patients with GLL who underwent hip arthroscopy in the setting of symptomatic labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and (2) to compare clinical results with a matched-pair control group without GLL. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data from a prospectively collected database were retrospectively reviewed between August 2014 and December 2016. Patients were considered eligible if they received primary arthroscopic treatment for symptomatic labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement. Inclusion criteria included preoperative and minimum 2-year follow-up scores for the following PROs: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and visual analog scale for pain (VAS). From the sample population, 2 groups were created: the GLL group (Beighton score ≥4) and the control group (Beighton score <4). Patients were matched in a 1:2 ratio via propensity score matching according to age, sex, body mass index, Tönnis grade, and preoperative lateral center-edge angle. Patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for mHHS, Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Scale (HOS-SSS), and International Hip Outcome Tool–12 (iHOT-12) were calculated. Results: A total of 57 patients with GLL were matched to 88 control patients. Age, sex, body mass index, and follow-up times were not different between groups ( P > .05). Preoperative radiographic measurements demonstrated no difference between groups. Intraoperative findings and procedures between groups were similar except for capsular treatment, with the GLL group receiving a greater percentage of capsular plications ( P = .04). At minimum 2-year follow-up, both groups showed significant improvement in PROs and VAS ( P < .001). Furthermore, the postoperative PROs at minimum 2-year follow-up and the magnitude of improvement (delta value) were similar between groups for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and VAS ( P > .05). Moreover, groups reached comparable rates of MCID and PASS for mHHS, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-12. Conclusion: Patients with GLL after hip arthroscopy for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement and labral tears may expect favorable outcomes with appropriate labral and capsular management at minimum 2-year follow-up. When compared with a pair-matched control group without GLL, results were comparable for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and VAS and reached PASS and/or MCID for mHHS, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-12.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Vitamin E in Methotrexate-Induced Hepatotoxicity in Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Open-Label Case-Control Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Binit Vaidya ◽  
Manisha Bhochhibhoya ◽  
Shweta Nakarmi
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Vitamin E ◽  
Treatment Group ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Control Study

Objective. To examine the efficacy of vitamin E in methotrexate- (MTX-) induced transaminitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. A case-control study was conducted at a tertiary rheumatology center for 12 months. Patients with RA on MTX and deranged aminotransferases were included. Patients with previous liver diseases, baseline transaminitis before methotrexate initiation, alcohol intake, muscle diseases, under hepatotoxic drugs, and aminotransferases>3 times the upper normal limit were excluded. The patients were divided into treatment (vitamin E 400 mg bid for 3 months) and control groups (no vitamin E) using a random number table. The dose of MTX was unaltered. Follow-up was done after 3 and 6 months. Independent t-test was done to compare means of two groups. Paired t-test was done to compare differences in mean. Results. Among 230 patients, 86.5% were female with a mean BMI of 25.9±4.5 kg/m2. In the treatment group, SGPT and SGOT at baseline were 73.1±20.4 and 60.2±24.5 IU/L, respectively; at 3-month follow-up 44.6±34.2 and 38.3±20.8 IU/L, respectively; and at 6-month follow-up 40.4±35.7 and 34.2±21.9 IU/L, respectively. In the control group, SGPT and SGOT at baseline were 63.4±15.1 and 46.8±13.7 IU/L, respectively, and at 3-month follow-up 55.8±45.9 and 45.5±30.9 IU/L, respectively. Significant decrease in the level of aminotransferases was seen in the treatment group (p value < 0.001) and not in the control group (p values 0.161 and 0.728, respectively). The change in levels of SGPT and SGOT from baseline to 3 months of follow-up was statistically significant in between two study groups (p values 0.007 and <0.001, respectively). From the control group, 29 patients were crossed over to vitamin E for the next 3 months. SGPT and SGOT decreased from 97.6±44.1 to 46.1±40.9 and 69.3±34.9 to 29.1±11.6 IU/L, respectively (p values 0.031 and 0.017, respectively). Conclusion. Vitamin E significantly attenuates MTX-induced transaminitis.

Functional and Clinical Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Revision Hip Arthroscopy With Borderline Hip Dysplasia at 2-Year Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 3240-3247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jourdan M. Cancienne ◽  
Edward C. Beck ◽  
Kyle N. Kunze ◽  
Jorge Chahla ◽  
Sunikom Suppauksorn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Hip Dysplasia

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Revision Hip Arthroscopy for Synovial Chondromatosis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanying Gao ◽  
Hongjie Huang ◽  
Jianquan Wang ◽  
Yingfang Ao ◽  
Yan Xu
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Synovial Chondromatosis ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Radiographic Evaluation ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Outcome Tool

Abstract Background: Synovial chondromatosis (SC) is a relatively rare disease and there were few studies on causes and clinical outcomes of revision surgery for SC. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes of revision hip arthroscopy for synovial chondromatosis.Methods: We evaluated consecutive patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy for SC in our hospital between January 2008 and January 2020. Radiographic evaluation was made before and after surgery. Preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and PROs at final follow-up were obtained, including visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS).Results: A total of 8 patients (mean age, 39.5 years; age range, 27-62 years; 5 males and 3 females) were included in this study. The recurrence rate of hip SC in our hospital was 6.8%. The average follow-up period after surgery was 47.3 months (range, 12–120 months). Before surgery, mean mHHS was 60.6±17.3 (range, 20-77), mean iHOT-12 was 43.8±13.7 (range, 18-69), and mean VAS was 3.1±1.7 (range, 1-7). At the final post-operative follow-up, mean mHHS was 83.8±16.6 (range, 43-91), iHOT-12 was 80.6±19.7 (range, 32-90), and mean VAS was 0.6±1.8 (range, 0-5). All results demonstrated statistically significant improvement (P < 0.05). Recurrence of SC was found in 2 patients 1 year and 4 years after revision hip arthroscopy, respectively.Conclusion: Hip arthroscopy had good clinical outcomes for revision surgery of SC.

scholarly journals Predictors of Clinical Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy: 5 Year Follow- Up Analysis of 1038 Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0038
Author(s):  
Benjamin Domb ◽  
Cammille Go ◽  
David Maldonado ◽  
Sarah Chen ◽  
Ajay Lall
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Joint Space ◽  
Bivariate Analysis

Objectives: Identify predictive factors of midterm outcomes after hip arthroscopy in a cohort of 1038 patients, whose outcomes at minimum 2-year follow-up have previously been reported. In addition, to provide a comparison of short-term and midterm predictive factors in outcome measures following hip arthroscopy. Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed on all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between February 2008 and June 2012. Patients were included if they had minimum 5-year follow-up on 3 patient reported outcomes: Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS). Patients were excluded if they had any prior ipsilateral hip conditions. Using bivariate and multivariate analyses, we analyzed the effect of 36 preoperative and intraoperative variables on NAHS. Results: A total of 1038 patients met our listed inclusion and exclusion criteria, with a mean follow-up time of 62.0 months (range, 60.0 - 120.0 months). The bivariate analysis identified 11 variables (4 categorical and 7 continuous) that were predictive of 5-year postoperative NAHS. For the multivariate analysis, 7 variables were identified as being significant: preoperative NAHS, body mass index (BMI), age, lateral joint space, alpha angle, revision hip arthroscopy, and acetabular microfracture. These 7 variables were also predictive in the bivariate analysis. Conclusion: This study reports favorable midterm clinical outcomes in the largest cohort of hip arthroscopies with minimum 5-year follow up in the literature to date. Seven variables were identified as being significant predictors in both the bivariate and multivariate analysis: preoperative NAHS, body mass index (BMI), age, lateral joint space, alpha angle, revision hip arthroscopy, and acetabular microfracture. Of these, preoperative NAHS, BMI, age, and revision hip arthroscopy were predictive of both 2-year and 5-year postoperative NAHS. These predictive factors may prove useful to clinicians in determining indications for hip arthroscopy and counseling patients on its expected outcomes.

scholarly journals Superior Clinical Outcomes with Capsular Closure versus Non-Closure in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2325967118S0000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioanna Bolia ◽  
Karen K. Briggs ◽  
Marc J. Philippon
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Lateral Center Edge Angle ◽  
Closure Group ◽  
Center Edge Angle

Objectives: Controversy still exists on closing the capsule following hip arthroscopy. It is unclear if capsular closure at the end of hip arthroscopy results in better clinical outcomes compared to non-closure. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes in patients who had a closed capsule to those without a closed capsule following hip arthroscopic labral repair by a single surgeon. Methods: Patients who did not have capsular closure were identified by reviewing arthroscopy video (non-closure group). Fifty consecutive patients without capsular closure were matched with fifty patients who had capsular closure. All patients underwent primary hip arthroscopy and labral repair. The primary patient-reported outcome measure was Hip Outcome Score(HOS)-ADL. Secondary outcome measures included the modified Harris hip score(MHHS), HOS-Sport, WOMAC, general health, and patient satisfaction with outcome. Patients with lateral center edge angle less than 25º were excluded. Results: There were 23 females and 27 males with an average age of 36 years (range:14 to 77) in each group. The average lateral center edge angle was 34º (range, 27 to 48) in both groups. The alpha angle was 68º (range, 40 to 134) in the non-closure group and 70º (range, 41 to 98) in the closure group. No patient had microfractures at the time of surgery. The average follow-up time was 5 years (non-closure group range: 3-10; closure group range 3-9). Eight patients (16%) in the non-closure group required total hip arthroplasty(THA), while 4 patients (8%) in the closure group required THA. Six patients in the non-closure group and 3 patients in the closure group required revision hip arthroscopy. Of those patients who did not require revision or THA, there was a significant difference in the HOS ADL score and the secondary outcome measures (see table). Capsular closure resulted in superior clinical outcomes compared to non-closure. Conclusion: There were twice as many conversion to THA and twice as many hip arthroscopy revisions in patients undergoing hip arthroscopic labral repair without capsular closure compared to those with closure. In addition, the closure group showed significantly higher outcomes scores compared to the non-closure at 5-year follow-up time. [Table: see text]

Predictors of Clinical Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy: A Prospective Analysis of 1038 Patients With 2-Year Follow-up

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 1324-1330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
Timothy J. Martin ◽  
Chengcheng Gui ◽  
Sivashankar Chandrasekaran ◽  
Carlos Suarez-Ahedo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Multivariate Analyses ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms ◽  
Outcome Instrument ◽  
Outcome Score ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: As hip arthroscopy has expanded in popularity and volume, more information is needed about indications for the procedure and the predictive factors of clinical outcomes. Purpose: To evaluate clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy in a prospective study and to analyze the cohort to identify factors that are predictive of improvement. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were collected prospectively on all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between February 2008 and June 2012. We included all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy who agreed to participate and who completed 4 patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments at a minimum 2-year follow-up: the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale. The NAHS was selected as our primary outcome instrument. All patients with any previous hip conditions were excluded. We analyzed 34 preoperative and intraoperative variables using bivariate and multivariate analyses compared with NAHS. Results: The cohort consisted of 1038 patients with a mean follow-up of 30.1 months (range, 24.0-61.2 months). Mean age was 36.4 years (range, 13.2-76.4 years). All postoperative PRO scores showed significant improvement ( P < .001) at 2 years compared with preoperative scores. Bivariate analysis identified 15 variables (7 categorical and 8 continuous) and multivariate analysis identified 10 variables that were predictive of 2-year postoperative NAHS. Preoperative NAHS, preoperative HOS-ADL, preoperative mHHS, age, duration of symptoms, body mass index (BMI), and revision hip arthroscopy were identified as predictive factors in both bivariate and multivariate analyses. The predictive value of preoperative NAHS was accentuated for patients with higher BMI. Conclusion: This study reports favorable clinical outcomes in the largest cohort of hip arthroscopies with a minimum 2-year follow-up in the literature to date. Factors identified as predictive in both bivariate and multivariate analyses included preoperative NAHS, HOS-ADL, and mHHS; age; duration of symptoms; BMI; and revision hip arthroscopy. These predictive factors may be useful to the clinician in determining prognosis and operative indications for hip arthroscopy.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes after Arthroscopic Repair of Gluteus Medius with a Two-year Minimum Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0044
Author(s):  
David Bloom ◽  
David Kirby ◽  
Thomas Youm ◽  
Jordan Fried
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Gluteus Medius ◽  
Arthroscopic Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Partial Group ◽  
Patient Reported

Objectives: Hip arthroscopy has replaced the need for many open surgeries including repairs of gluteus medius tendon tear. There are only a few studies that have analyzed patient reported outcomes at 2 years for arthroscopic gluteus medius tendon repair. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients who underwent arthroscopic gluteus medius repair with at least 2 year follow-up. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective IRB approved study. Between August 2010 and August 2016, patients who underwent hip arthroscopy with gluteus medius repair by a single surgeon were evaluated at baseline and two year follow-up via Modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS) and Non-arthritic Hip Score (NAHS). Inclusion criteria included all patients who received arthroscopic repair of the full or partial thickness tears of the gluteus medius tendon and had a minimum follow up of at least two years. Paired t-test was used for statistical comparison between baseline and follow-up for each respective outcome score and group. Results: 20 hips were evaluated, met the inclusion criteria and separated based on partial (group one) or full thickness tear (group two). The study population comprised of 15 (79%) females and 4 (21%) males. Group one presented with a mean age of 54.8 ± 11.3 years and an average BMI of 25.1 ± 4.0. Group two presented with a mean age of 46 ± 11.4 and an average BMI of 25.5 ± 4.0. Patients in group one reported an average preoperative MHHS and NAHS of 33.6 ± 11.3 and 40.4 ± 14.9, respectively. At 2 year follow-up, an average MHHS and NAHS of 72.9 ± 22.9 and 77.2 ± 19.7 was reported, respectively. Patients in group two reported an average preoperative MHHS and NAHS of 43.8 ± 14.7 and 46.4 ± 8.3, respectively. At 2 year follow-up, an average MHHS and NAHS of 80.1 ± 8.5 and 79.5 ± 10.1, respectively. There was significant clinical improvement at the 2 year follow-up, relating to both outcome measures in each subject group (p<0.0004). Conclusions: After a minimum of two years for follow-up, arthroscopic repair of gluteus medius tears proves to be an effective approach and treatment. In the future, studies looking at longer follow-up time would help determine if the current approach maintains long-term clinical improvement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document