Primary Circumferential Acetabular Labral Reconstruction: Achieving Outcomes Similar to Primary Labral Repair Despite More Challenging Patient Characteristics

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (9) ◽  
pp. 2079-2088 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Scanaliato ◽  
Daniel L. Christensen ◽  
Catherine Salfiti ◽  
Mackenzie M. Herzog ◽  
Andrew B. Wolff
Keyword(s):  
Short Form ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
High Stress ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Iliotibial Band ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Visual Analog Scales ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Severe Pathology

Background: Treatment of acetabular labral tears with moderate or severe intrasubstance damage or segmental defects remains a substantial challenge. Circumferential labral reconstruction with iliotibial band allograft is a relatively new technique that has been proposed to restore stability and eliminate high-stress junction points. Purpose: To compare outcomes between hips treated with primary allograft circumferential labral reconstruction and primary labral repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All consecutive hips between 2014 and 2015 that underwent primary reconstruction or primary repair by the senior surgeon were included and compared. Hips that had a prior intra-articular procedure were excluded. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores and visual analog scales were completed by patients within 1 week before surgery and between 22 and 26 months postoperatively. PROs included the modified Harris Hip Score, the International Hip Outcome Tool, and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey for physical health. Pain and satisfaction were assessed with visual analog scales. Crude and inverse probability of treatment weighting comparisons of PROs between groups were performed. Results: A total of 162 hips met the inclusion criteria for this study, including 99 labral repairs and 63 complete labral reconstructions. Patients who underwent labral reconstruction were, on average, older (43.4 vs 29.5 years; P < .01), had a slightly higher body mass index (24.6 vs 23.0; P < .01), had hips with a higher Tönnis grade (grade 1 or 2: 25% vs 9%; P < .01), had higher preoperative pain scores (49.9 vs 41.5; P = .01), and had hips with more severe pathology (68% vs 5%; P < .01) as compared with patients with labral repair hips. Five (5%) labral repair hips and 5 (8%) labral reconstruction hips failed treatment ( P = .48). Among hips that did not fail (n = 94 repairs, n = 58 reconstructions), all demonstrated statistically significant improvements in PROs, and there was no statistical difference in PROs between groups after weighting ( P > .05). Conclusion: Primary circumferential labral reconstruction is a viable treatment option with promising short-term outcomes for hips that demonstrate moderate or severe labral damage. Despite less favorable preoperative characteristics, labral reconstruction offers similar outcomes when compared with labral repair in hips with less severe pathology.

Is Microfracture Necessary? Acetabular Chondrolabral Debridement/Abrasion Demonstrates Similar Outcomes and Survival to Microfracture in Hip Arthroscopy: A Multicenter Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (7) ◽  
pp. 1670-1678 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Hevesi ◽  
Christopher Bernard ◽  
David E. Hartigan ◽  
Bruce A. Levy ◽  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Treatment Technique ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Acetabular Cartilage ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Cartilage Lesions ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Grade 3

Background: Hip arthroscopy is becoming more advanced and commonly performed. However, significant controversy exists regarding whether high-grade acetabular cartilage lesions should be treated with debridement/abrasion or microfracture. In addition, patients treated with microfracture are subject to extended protected weightbearing rehabilitation to mitigate risk of subchondral plate fracture and to protect fibrocartilage tissue formation. Purpose: To determine the midterm patient-reported outcomes and failure rate of patients with grade 3 and 4 acetabular labrum articular disruption (ALAD) lesions managed with debridement/abrasion or microfracture. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Primary arthroscopic labral repair cases at 2 centers from November 2008 to April 2016 were reviewed for patients aged <55 years with unipolar ALAD grade 3 and 4 chondrolabral acetabular delamination. Patients undergoing microfracture and debridement/abrasion were compared using the visual analog pain scale (VAS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Hip Outcome Score–Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS) to determine predictors of outcomes and failure. Results: A total of 113 hips in 110 patients (66 males, 44 females; mean age, 34.5 ± 1.1 years) undergoing debridement/abrasion (n = 82) or microfracture (n = 31) were followed for a mean of 4.9 years (range, 2.0-8.5 years). Lesion size was not statistically different between the debridement/abrasion (1.3 ± 1.0 cm2) and microfracture cohorts (1.4 ± 1.0 cm2) ( P = .47). Patients undergoing debridement/abrasion achieved 3.6-point mean improvements in VAS ( P < .01), 21.2-point improvements in mHHS ( P < .01), and 25.4-point improvements in HOS-SSS ( P < .01), which were not significantly different from those observed in microfracture patients ( P≥ .20). The 5-year rate of survival free of revision surgery was 84.0% in the debridement/abrasion group and 85.6% in the microfracture group ( P = .78). The cartilage treatment technique was found not to be predictive of revision risk during both univariate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; P = .98) and multivariate (HR, 0.93; P = .90) analysis accounting for patient age, lesion grade, and acetabular coverage. Conclusion: Patients undergoing debridement/abrasion of high-grade unipolar acetabular cartilage lesions demonstrate similar outcome scores and revision rates compared with those of patients undergoing microfracture. These outcomes support the consideration of preferential debridement/abrasion at the discretion of the treating surgeon to optimize recovery while maintaining established positive outcomes after hip arthroscopy.

scholarly journals Development of the HOOSglobal to Assess Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Hip Preservation Procedures

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 940-946 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cale A. Jacobs ◽  
Michael R. Peabody ◽  
Stephen T. Duncan ◽  
Ryan D. Muchow ◽  
Ryan M. Nunley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Periacetabular Osteotomy ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Orthopaedic Community ◽  
Pro Tools ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score

Background: The creation of a single patient-reported outcome (PRO) platform validated across hip preservation, osteoarthritis (OA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) populations may reduce barriers and streamline the routine collection of PROs in clinical practice. As such, the purpose of this study was to determine if augmenting the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score–Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR) with additional HOOS questions would result in a PRO platform that could be used across a wider spectrum of hip patient populations. Hypothesis: The HOOS, JR would demonstrate a notable ceiling effect, but by augmenting the HOOS, JR with additional HOOS questions, a responsive PRO platform could be created. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Using preoperative and postoperative HOOS responses from a sample of 304 patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), additional items were identified to augment the HOOS, JR. The psychometric properties of a newly created PRO tool (HOOSglobal) were then compared with the HOOS, JR and other PRO instruments developed for patients with hip OA and/or undergoing THA. Results: By augmenting the HOOS, JR with 2 additional questions, the HOOSglobal was more responsive than all other included PRO tools and had significantly fewer maximum postoperative scores than the HOOS, JR ( P < .0001), HOOS–Physical Function Short form ( P < .0001), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index ( P = .02), University of California, Los Angeles activity scale ( P = .0002), and modified Harris Hip Score ( P = .04). The postoperative HOOSglobal score threshold associated with patients achieving the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) was 62.5. Conclusion: The HOOSglobal is a valid and responsive PRO tool after PAO and may potentially provide the orthopaedic community with a PRO platform to be used across hip-related subspecialties. For patients undergoing PAO, a postoperative HOOSglobal score ≥62.5 was associated with patients achieving the PASS.

scholarly journals Patient-reported outcome score utilisation in arthroscopic hip preservation: we are all doing it differently, if at all

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 213-217
Author(s):  
Derek M Klavas ◽  
Neil Duplantier ◽  
Brayden Gerrie ◽  
Patrick C McCulloch ◽  
Shane J Nho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Joint ◽  
General Health ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Outcome Score ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Scores

ObjectivesTo determine which outcome scores physicians are using in hip preservation surgery, as well as when they are administered, who administers them and on what platform.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted to examine which patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores are being used by hip preservation surgeons, including hip joint–specific, lower extremity limb–specific, disease-specific, general health, quality of life, pain, activity, spine and psychiatric wellness scores. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics.ResultsFifty-six surgeons responded (mean 169 arthroscopic, 65 open hip preservation surgeries per year; mean 13 years experience). 13% of surgeons did not collect any patient outcome scores. A total of 25 different PROs were reported. Of 13 possible hip joint–specific outcome scores, the modified Harris Hip Score was most frequently collected (46%), followed by International Hip Outcome Tool−12 (41%) and Hip Outcome Score (38%). There was considerable heterogeneity in hip joint–specific PROs (I2 86%). The Short Form−12 was the most common general health score (30%). Tegner and UCLA Activity scores were collected by 11% of participants. Fifty-nine per cent collected outcomes preoperatively, 45% at 3 months, 54% at 6 months, 61% at 1 year and 32% annually. Paper collection was the most common collection platform (46%), and a dedicated research assistant was most frequently the source of data collection (34%).ConclusionThis international survey demonstrates that although most hip preservation surgeons collect hip outcome scores, there is a large amount of heterogeneity in outcome scores used and method of collection. As hip preservation evidence continues to evolve, these results should emphasise the need for an initiative to standardise outcome score collection.Level of evidenceLevel V.

Multicenter Outcomes After Revision Hip Arthroscopy: Comparative Analysis of 2-Year Outcomes After Labral Repair Versus Labral Reconstruction

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110305
Author(s):  
Blake M. Bodendorfer ◽  
Thomas D. Alter ◽  
Andrew B. Wolff ◽  
Dominic S. Carreira ◽  
John J. Cristoforetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Cartilage Damage ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Outcome Score ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Labral Tears ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: There is a paucity of literature evaluating patient outcomes in patients undergoing revision labral repair and labral reconstruction. Purpose: To compare outcomes in patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy for treatment of labral tears by labral repair or labral reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained multicenter database of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy was performed. An a priori power analysis determined that a total of 62 patients were required. Patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy for labral tears with completed 2-year outcome scores were included. Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy, labral debridement, concomitant gluteal repair, and patients with hip dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle <20°) were excluded. Patients were grouped into revision labral repair and labral reconstruction groups. Patient demographics and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including Hip Outcome Score – Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score – Sport Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score, international Hip Outcome Tool-12, visual analog scale for pain and satisfaction, and achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were analyzed. Results: A total of 40 patients underwent revision labral repair and 55 patients underwent labral reconstruction. Patients undergoing revision labral repair were younger (mean age, 30.0 ± 10.7 years vs 34.4 ± 9.7 years; P = .048), had lower rates of labral degeneration (25.0% vs 62.7%; P = .004), and had lower rates of severe complexity of tears (21.1% vs 66.0%; P = .003). However, the labral repair group had higher rates of articular cartilage damage (62.5% vs 33.3%; P = .009). There were no differences in any preoperative or 2-year postoperative PROs. Furthermore, no differences were seen in achievement of MCID or PASS in any PRO. Conclusion: In this multicenter study on revision hip arthroscopy, patients undergoing revision labral repair were younger and had better labral characteristics but greater cartilage damage compared with patients undergoing labral reconstructions. Despite these differences, patients who underwent labral repair reported similar outcomes to those undergoing labral reconstruction.

When Do Patients Improve After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement? A Prospective Cohort Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (13) ◽  
pp. 3111-3118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio E. Flores ◽  
Joseph R. Sheridan ◽  
Kristina R. Borak ◽  
Alan L. Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Cohort Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Physical Component Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has been shown to improve patient outcomes, especially for returning to sport. Although previous studies often evaluated outcomes 2 years after hip arthroscopy, there has been no analysis of the progression of patient improvement over time or with respect to achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose was to prospectively evaluate changes in patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores during the first 2 years after hip arthroscopy for FAI and to analyze when the MCID is achieved. It was hypothesized that clinically significant changes will be reached by 1 year after surgery. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI were prospectively enrolled, and they completed the 12-Item Short Form Health survey (SF-12), modified Harris Hip Score, and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) at preoperative baseline and 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery. Mean scores and the percentage of patients reaching the MCID at each time point were analyzed via analysis of variance and Cochrane-Armitage trend tests. Results: A total of 129 hips from 122 patients were evaluated, revealing significant improvements after hip arthroscopy for FAI (PRO scores increased 19 to 45 points) with 95.8%, 93.6%, and 84.8% of patients achieving the MCID for HOOS-Sports, HOOS–Quality of Life (QoL), and HOOS-Pain, respectively, at 2-year follow-up. Analysis of PRO change showed that for all scores, the greatest improvement occurred from presurgery to postoperative 3 months, with lesser improvements at subsequent 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year time points ( P < .001). The SF-12 physical component score, HOOS-Sports, and HOOS-QoL continued to show statistically significant improvements through 2 years, while other scores plateaued after 3 months. The percentage of patients achieving the MCID for HOOS-Sports, HOOS-QoL, and HOOS-Pain continued to increase over 2 years, but the percentage achieving the MCID did not increase after 3 months for all other scores. Conclusion: Hip arthroscopy for FAI yields significant improvements in patient outcomes within 2 years of surgery. The majority of improvement occurs within 3 months after surgery, but certain outcomes, such as returning to sport, QoL, and pain, can continue to improve through 2 years.

scholarly journals Is There a Gender Gap in Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement? Assessment of Clinically Meaningful Improvements in a Prospective Cohort

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 232596711990056
Author(s):  
Sergio E. Flores ◽  
Caitlin C. Chambers ◽  
Kristina R. Borak ◽  
Alan L. Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score

Background: Although patients have experienced significant improvements after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), prior studies suggest that women have worse outcomes than men. These previous studies lack comparisons of patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores based on gender with respect to clinical significance measurements, including the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). Purpose: To evaluate outcomes after hip arthroscopy for FAI based on patient gender by prospectively assessing changes in PRO scores, MCID, and PASS. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Women and men undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI were prospectively enrolled, and preoperative radiographic and intraoperative findings were collected. Patients completed the following PRO surveys before surgery and 2 years postoperatively: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey. Mean scores and percentage of patients reaching MCID and PASS were analyzed. Results: A total of 131 hips were included (72 women, 59 men). Women had smaller preoperative alpha angles (59.1° vs 63.7°, respectively; P < .001) and lower acetabular cartilage injury grade (6.9% vs 22.0% with grade 4 injury, respectively; P = .013). Both women and men achieved equivalent significant improvements in PRO scores after surgery (scores increased 18.4 to 45.1 points for mHHS and HOOS). Women and men reached PASS for mHHS at similar rates (76.4% and 77.2%, respectively; P = .915). MCID was also achieved at similar rates between women and men for all scores (range, 61.4%-88.9%) except the activities of daily living subscale of the HOOS, in which a greater percentage of women reached MCID compared with men (79.2% vs 62.7%, respectively; P = .037). Additional stratification by age group using the median cohort age of 34 years showed no significant differences in PRO improvement based on age group for each gender. Conclusion: Women can achieve clinically meaningful improvements in PRO scores after hip arthroscopy for FAI. Compared with men, women demonstrated equivalent high rates of achieving MCID and PASS at 2 years after surgery.

Are Results of Arthroscopic Labral Repair Durable in Dysplasia at Midterm Follow-up? A 2-Center Matched Cohort Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (7) ◽  
pp. 1674-1684 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Hevesi ◽  
David E. Hartigan ◽  
Isabella T. Wu ◽  
Bruce A. Levy ◽  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Analysis ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Capsular Repair ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Tönnis Grade

Background: Studies assessing dysplasia’s effect on hip arthroscopy are often limited to the short term and unable to account for demographic factors that may vary between dysplastic and nondysplastic populations. Purpose: To determine the midterm failure rate and patient-reported outcomes of arthroscopic labral repair in the setting of dysplasia and make subsequent failure and outcome comparisons with a rigorously matched nondysplastic control group. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Primary arthroscopic labral repair cases at 2 centers from 2008 to 2011 were reviewed. Patients with lateral center edge angle (LCEA) <25° were matched to nondysplastic controls by age, sex, laterality, body mass index (BMI), Tönnis grade, and capsular repair per a 1:2 matching algorithm. Groups were compared with a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS) to determine predictors of outcome and failure. Results: Forty-eight patients with dysplasia (mean LCEA, 21.6°; range, 13.0°-24.9°; n = 25 with capsular repair) were matched to 96 controls (mean LCEA, 32.1°; range, 25°-52°; n = 50 with capsular repair) and followed for a mean of 5.7 years (range, 5.0-7.7 years). Patients achieved mean VAS improvements of 3.3 points, mHHS of 19.5, and HOS-SSS of 29.0 points ( P < .01) with no significant differences between the dysplasia and control populations ( P > .05). Five-year failure-free survival was 83.3% for patients with dysplasia and 78.1% for controls ( P = .53). No survival or outcomes difference was observed between patients with dysplasia who did or did not have capsular repair ( P ≥ .45) or when comparing LCEA <20° and LCEA 20° to 25° ( P ≥ .60). BMI ≤30 was associated with increased revision surgery risk ( P < .01). Age >35 years ( P < .05) and Tönnis grade 0 radiographs ( P < .01) predicted failure to reach minimal clinically important differences. Conclusion: With careful selection and modern techniques, patients with dysplasia can benefit significantly and durably from arthroscopic labral repair. The dysplastic cohort had outcomes and failure rates similar to those of rigorously matched controls at midterm follow-up. Subanalyses comparing LCEA <20° and LCEA 20° to 25° are presented for completeness; however, this study was not designed to detect differences in dysplastic subpopulations. BMI ≤30 was associated with increased revision risk. Age >35 years and Tönnis grade 0 radiographs predicted failure to achieve minimal clinically important differences.

Return to Sports and Minimum 2-Year Outcomes of Primary Arthroscopic Hip Labral Reconstruction for Irreparable Tears in High-Level Athletes With a Propensity-Matched Benchmarking Against a Labral Repair Control Group

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110325
Author(s):  
Andrew E. Jimenez ◽  
Peter F. Monahan ◽  
Jade S. Owens ◽  
David R. Maldonado ◽  
Benjamin R. Saks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Return To Sport ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Labral Tears ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
High Level

Background: Labral reconstruction has shown promise for the treatment of irreparable labral tears in high-level athletes. The literature is scarce regarding outcomes and timing of return to sports (RTS) in these patients. Purpose: (1) To report minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores and RTS characteristics for high-level athletes undergoing primary labral reconstruction for irreparable labral tears and (2) to compare clinical results with a matched control group of athletes undergoing labral repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for high school, college, and professional athletes who underwent a primary arthroscopic labral reconstruction between January 2010 and June 2018. Minimum 2-year PROs were compared for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Hip Outcome Score–Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), as well as the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, patient satisfaction, and RTS. The percentages of patients achieving the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the mHHS (PASS, >74 points; MCID, >8 points) and HOS-SSS (PASS, >75 points; MCID, >6 points) were also recorded. These patients were propensity score matched in a 1:3 ratio to other high-level athletes undergoing labral repair. Results: A total of 17 high-level athletes with primary arthroscopic labral reconstruction were included with a median follow-up time of 37.1 months (95% CI, 37.2-60.3 months). They demonstrated significant improvement from preoperatively to the latest follow-up for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and VAS for pain ( P < .05). Further, patients achieved PASS/MCID for mHHS at high rates (PASS, 84.2%; MCID, 68.4%). Athletes were able to return to sport-specific training at a median of 3.33 months (95% CI, 3.07-4.71 months) and RTS at a median of 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.08-11.98 months). Fourteen (82.4%) of reconstructions and 29 (82.8%) of repairs either returned to sport or decided not to do so for reasons unrelated to the hip. PROs, RTS rate, and PASS/MCID rates were similar between the labral reconstruction group and a control labral repair group ( P > .05). Conclusion: Primary arthroscopic labral reconstruction for irreparable labral tears was associated with significant improvement in PROs and high rates of RTS in high-level athletes. These results were comparable with those of a control group of athletes undergoing labral repair.

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

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.

Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopic Surgery in Adolescents With a Subanalysis on Return to Sport: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 1526-1534
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Chen ◽  
David R. Maldonado ◽  
Cammille C. Go ◽  
Cynthia Kyin ◽  
Ajay C. Lall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Arthroscopic Surgery ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Functional Improvement ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Mean

Background: There is a plethora of literature on outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery in the adult population; however, outcomes in the adolescent population have not been as widely reported. Additionally, as adolescents represent a very active population, it is imperative to understand their athletic activity and return to sport after hip arthroscopic surgery. Purpose: To analyze patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after hip arthroscopic surgery in adolescents (aged 10-19 years) and present a return-to-sport analysis in the athletic adolescent subgroup. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to identify articles that reported PROs after hip arthroscopic surgery in adolescents. The standardized mean difference was calculated to compare the effect size of hip arthroscopic surgery on various PROs. For the athletic subgroup, a return-to-sport summary was also provided. Results: Ten studies, with 618 adolescent hips and a collective study period of December 2004 to February 2015, were included in this systematic review. Across all studies, the mean age was 15.8 years (range, 11.0-19.9 years), and female patients composed approximately 56.7% of the entire cohort. The mean follow-up was 34.5 months (range, 12-120 months). The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) was reported in 9 studies, and at latest follow-up, scores were excellent in 4 studies (range, 90-95) and good in the remaining 5 studies (range, 82.1-89.6). All adolescents also showed significant improvement on the Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), the Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), the HOS–Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), the physical component of the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12P), a visual analog scale for pain (VAS), and both versions of the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12 and iHOT-33) at latest follow-up ( P < .05). Further, mean improvements reported in all studies surpassed reported values of the minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state for the mHHS, HOS-ADL, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-33. Finally, the collective return-to-sport rate among athletic adolescents was 84.9%. Conclusion: In the setting of labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement, hip arthroscopic surgery can safely be performed in adolescents and leads to significant functional improvement. Furthermore, athletic adolescents return to sport at high levels after hip arthroscopic surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document