Post-Related Complications in Hip Arthroscopy are Reported Significantly Higher in Prospective versus Retrospective Literature – A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Austin E. Wininger ◽  
Omer Mei-Dan ◽  
Thomas J. Ellis ◽  
Brian D. Lewis ◽  
Robert C. Kollmorgen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy

Clinical and radiographic predictors of failed hip arthroscopy in the management of dysplasia: a systematic review and proposal for classification

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 1296-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay Shah ◽  
Jeffrey Kay ◽  
Muzammil Memon ◽  
Nicole Simunovic ◽  
Soshi Uchida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Hip Arthroscopy for Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome and Labral Tears: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 232596712098753
Author(s):  
Cammille C. Go ◽  
Cynthia Kyin ◽  
Jeffrey W. Chen ◽  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
David R. Maldonado
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Nonoperative Treatment ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Labral Tears ◽  
The Cost

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.

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

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.

Return to Play After Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (11) ◽  
pp. 2780-2788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michaela O’Connor ◽  
Anas A. Minkara ◽  
Robert W. Westermann ◽  
James Rosneck ◽  
T. Sean Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Return To Play ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Rehabilitation Protocols ◽  
The Mean

Background: The use of arthroscopic treatment for intra-articular hip pathology has demonstrated improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with a lower rate of complications, reoperation, and patient morbidity as compared with traditional methods. Although the use of this minimally invasive approach has increased in prevalence, no evidence-based return-to-play (RTP) criteria have been developed to ensure an athlete’s preparedness for sporting activities. Purpose: To determine if there exists sufficient evidence in the literature to support an RTP protocol and functional assessment after hip arthroscopy, as well as to assess the mean rate and duration of RTP. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: The search terms “hip arthroscopy,” “return to play,” and 10 related terms were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science, yielding 263 articles. After screening, 22 articles were included. RTP timeline, rehabilitation protocols, and conditional criteria measures were assessed with previously established criteria. Pooled estimates were calculated for RTP rate and duration, and weighted mean scores were determined for PROs. Results: A total of 1296 patients with 1442 total hips were identified. Although 54.5% (12 of 22) of studies did not provide a guideline for RTP duration after hip arthroscopy, 36.4% (8 of 22) recommended a duration of 4 months, while 9.1% (2 of 22) recommended 3 months. The most frequently described postoperative rehabilitation protocols were weightbearing guidelines (15 studies) and passive motion exercises (9 studies). Only 2 studies satisfied the criteria for a sufficient RTP protocol, and 3 provided a specific replicable test for RTP. The mean RTP duration was 7.4 months (95% CI, 6.1-8.8 months), and the return rate was 84.6% (95% CI, 80.4%-88.8%; P = .008) at a mean ± SD follow-up of 25.8 ± 2.4 months. Mean modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) improved from 63.1 to 84.1 postoperatively (+33.3%), while Non-arthritic Hip Score improved from 61.7 to 86.8 (+40.7%). A lower preoperative mHHS was significantly associated with a higher postoperative improvement ( r = −0.95, P = .0003). Conclusion: Significant variability exists in RTP protocols among institutions owing to a lack of standardization. Despite a high overall rate of RTP and improvement in PROs after hip arthroscopy, the majority of rehabilitation protocols are not evidence based and rely on expert opinion. No validated functional test currently exists to assess RTP.

scholarly journals Effect of Capsular Closure on Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy for Femoracetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 1153-1163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang Liu ◽  
Yan Zhang ◽  
Qi Gui ◽  
Feng Zhao ◽  
Xue‐Zhen Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Femoracetabular Impingement

Efficacy of Hip Arthroscopy for the Management of Septic Arthritis: A Systematic Review

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 1358-1370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren de SA ◽  
Stephanie Cargnelli ◽  
Michael Catapano ◽  
Devin Peterson ◽  
Nicole Simunovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Septic Arthritis ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy

Hip Dislocation or Subluxation After Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (7) ◽  
pp. 1428-1434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil L. Duplantier ◽  
Patrick C. McCulloch ◽  
Shane J. Nho ◽  
Richard C. Mather ◽  
Brian D. Lewis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Hip Dislocation

Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of Diagnoses, Operative Findings, and Outcomes

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 1382-1390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory L. Cvetanovich ◽  
Joshua D. Harris ◽  
Brandon J. Erickson ◽  
Bernard R. Bach ◽  
Charles A. Bush-Joseph ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Operative Findings

scholarly journals Return to Driving After Hip and Knee Arthroscopic Procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Palma ◽  
Purva Patel ◽  
Jeya Palan ◽  
HG Pandit ◽  
BH Van Duren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Knee Arthroscopy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Mesh Terms ◽  
Harm To Others ◽  
Assess Quality ◽  
Arthroscopic Procedures

Background: Hip and knee arthroscopies are common orthopaedic procedures. As patients are looking to return to their regular schedules and regain their independence post-surgery, physicians often encounter the question of, “when can I drive again?” While safety of the patient is of the utmost importance when making these recommendations, it is equally important to consider the possibility of harm to others and potential legal ramifications. The purpose of this study is to consolidate evidence from available literature and undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine when it is safe for patients to return to driving after hip and knee arthroscopic procedures.  Methods:  A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. OVID, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases were searched through June 2020 for articles containing keywords and/or MeSH terms “Hip arthroscopy” and “knee arthroscopy” in conjunction with “total brake response time” or “reaction time” in the context of automobile driving. Title review and full article review were done to assess quality and select relevant articles. Review Manager Version 5.4 was utilized for statistical analysis.   Results: 8 papers were included in the meta-analysis of Brake Reaction Time (BRT). Meta-analysis of all Knee BRTs showed times slower-than or equal-to-baseline BRTs through 5 weeks, with a trend of improving BRT from 6 to 10 weeks (only weeks 8 and 10 were significant P < 0.05). Of all Hip BRTs, week 2 showed slower-than-baseline BRTs, but after week 4 demonstrated a trend toward faster BRTs through week 8 (only week 8 was significant P < 0.05).   Conclusion: BRTs met baseline/control values and continued to improve after 6 weeks following knee arthroscopy and after 4 weeks following hip arthroscopy. Based on these results it would be safe to recommend return to driving at 6 weeks after knee arthroscopy and 4 weeks after hip arthroscopic procedures.   

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document