Systematic Review of Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement: The Importance of Labral Repair and Capsular Closure

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 646-656.e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Riff ◽  
Kyle N. Kunze ◽  
Kamran Movassaghi ◽  
Fady Hijji ◽  
Edward C. Beck ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 232596712098753
Author(s):  
Cammille C. Go ◽  
Cynthia Kyin ◽  
Jeffrey W. Chen ◽  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
David R. Maldonado

Background: Hip arthroscopy has frequently been shown to produce successful outcomes as a treatment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and labral tears. However, there is less literature on whether the favorable results of hip arthroscopy can justify the costs, especially when compared with a nonoperative treatment. Purpose: To systematically review the cost-effectiveness of hip arthroscopy for treating FAI and labral tears. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, and the Tufts University Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry were searched to identify articles that reported the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) generated by hip arthroscopy. The key terms used were “hip arthroscopy,” “cost,” “utility,” and “economic evaluation.” The threshold for cost-effectiveness was set at $50,000/QALY. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies instrument and Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) score were used to determine the quality of the studies. This study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020172991). Results: Six studies that reported the cost-effectiveness of hip arthroscopy were identified, and 5 of these studies compared hip arthroscopy to a nonoperative comparator. These studies were found to have a mean QHES score of 85.2 and a mean cohort age that ranged from 33-37 years. From both a health care system perspective and a societal perspective, 4 studies reported that hip arthroscopy was more costly but resulted in far greater gains than did nonoperative treatment. The preferred treatment strategy was most sensitive to duration of benefit, preoperative osteoarthritis, cost of the arthroscopy, and the improvement in QALYs with hip arthroscopy. Conclusion: In the majority of the studies, hip arthroscopy had a higher initial cost but provided greater gain in QALYs than did a nonoperative treatment. In certain cases, hip arthroscopy can be cost-effective given a long enough duration of benefit and appropriate patient selection. However, there is further need for literature to analyze willingness-to-pay thresholds.


2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110389
Author(s):  
Martin S. Davey ◽  
Eoghan T. Hurley ◽  
Matthew G. Davey ◽  
Jordan W. Fried ◽  
Andrew J. Hughes ◽  
...  

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.


2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 744-749 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Dippmann ◽  
Kristian Thorborg ◽  
Otto Kraemer ◽  
Søren Winge ◽  
Henrik Palm ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-232
Author(s):  
Claire E Fernandez ◽  
Allison M Morgan ◽  
Ujash Sheth ◽  
Vehniah K Tjong ◽  
Michael A Terry

Abstract One in four patients presenting with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has bilateral symptoms, and despite excellent outcomes reported after arthroscopic treatment of FAI, there remains a paucity of data on the outcomes following bilateral hip arthroscopy. This systematic review aims to examine the outcomes following bilateral (either ‘simultaneous’ or ‘staged’) versus unilateral hip arthroscopy for FAI. A systematic review of multiple electronic databases was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and checklist. All studies comparing simultaneous, staged and/or unilateral hip arthroscopy for FAI were eligible for inclusion. Case series, case reports and reviews were excluded. All study, patient and hip-specific data were extracted and analyzed. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality. A meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity among outcome measures. A total of six studies, including 722 patients (42.8% male) and 933 hips were eligible for inclusion. The mean age across patients was 35.5. The average time between staged procedures was 7.7 months. Four of the six studies were retrospective cohort studies, while the remaining two were prospective in nature. The overall quality of the eligible studies was found to be good. No significant difference was noted among patient-reported outcomes (modified Harris hip score, hip outcome score and non-arthritic hip score), visual analog scale, return to sport, traction time and complications between those undergoing bilateral (simultaneous or staged) versus unilateral hip arthroscopy. Based on the current available evidence, bilateral hip arthroscopy (whether simultaneous or staged) exhibits similar efficacy and safety when compared with unilateral hip arthroscopy. However, further prospective study is required to confirm this finding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document