Risk of Conversion to Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy: Validation of a Published Risk Score Using an Independent, Prospectively Collected Database

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652199382
Author(s):  
Mario Hevesi ◽  
Devin P. Leland ◽  
Philip J. Rosinsky ◽  
Ajay C. Lall ◽  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Score ◽  
Roc Curve ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
External Validation ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Brier Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score

Background: Hip arthroscopy is rapidly advancing and increasingly commonly performed. The most common surgery after arthroscopy is total hip arthroplasty (THA), which unfortunately occurs within 2 years of arthroscopy in up to 10% of patients. Predictive models for conversion to THA, such as that proposed by Redmond et al, have potentially substantial value in perioperative counseling and decreasing early arthroscopy failures; however, these models need to be externally validated to demonstrate broad applicability. Purpose: To utilize an independent, prospectively collected database to externally validate a previously published risk calculator by determining its accuracy in predicting conversion of hip arthroscopy to THA at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Hip arthroscopies performed at a single center between November 2015 and March 2017 were reviewed. Patients were assessed pre- and intraoperatively for components of the THA risk score studied—namely, age, modified Harris Hip Score, lateral center-edge angle, revision procedure, femoral version, and femoral and acetabular Outerbridge scores—and followed for a minimum of 2 years. Conversion to THA was determined along with the risk score’s receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Brier score calibration characteristics. Results: A total of 187 patients (43 men, 144 women, mean age, 36.0 ± 12.4 years) underwent hip arthroscopy and were followed for a mean of 2.9 ± 0.85 years (range, 2.0-5.5 years), with 13 patients (7%) converting to THA at a mean of 1.6 ± 0.9 years. Patients who converted to THA had a mean predicted arthroplasty risk of 22.6% ± 12.0%, compared with patients who remained arthroplasty-free with a predicted risk of 4.6% ± 5.3% ( P < .01). The Brier score for the calculator was 0.04 ( P = .53), which was not statistically different from ideal calibration, and the calculator demonstrated a satisfactory area under the curve of 0.894 ( P < .001). Conclusion: This external validation study supported our hypothesis in that the THA risk score described by Redmond et al was found to accurately predict which patients undergoing hip arthroscopy were at risk for converting to subsequent arthroplasty, with satisfactory discriminatory, ROC curve, and Brier score calibration characteristics. These findings are important in that they provide surgeons with validated tools to identify the patients at greatest risk for failure after hip arthroscopy and assist in perioperative counseling and decision making.

scholarly journals Is Hip Arthroscopy Effective in Patients With Combined Excessive Femoral Anteversion and Borderline Dysplasia? A Match-Controlled Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin O. Chaharbakhshi ◽  
David E. Hartigan ◽  
Itay Perets ◽  
Benjamin G. Domb
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Femoral Anteversion ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score ◽  
Lateral Center Edge Angle ◽  
Center Edge Angle

Background: Appropriate patient selection is critical when hip arthroscopy is considered in the setting of borderline dysplasia (BD). It is presumable that excessive femoral anteversion (EFA) and BD may contraindicate arthroscopy. Hypothesis: Patients with combined EFA and BD (EFABD) demonstrate significantly inferior short-term outcomes after arthroscopic labral preservation and capsular closure when compared with a similar control group with normal lateral coverage and femoral anteversion. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed on patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between April 2010 and November 2014. The EFABD group’s inclusion criteria were BD (lateral center-edge angle, 18°-25°), labral tear, capsular closure, and femoral version ≥20°, as well as preoperative modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale. Exclusion criteria were workers’ compensation, preoperative Tönnis grade >1, microfracture, abductor pathology, or previous ipsilateral hip surgery or conditions. Patients in the EFABD group were matched 1:2 to a similar control group with normal coverage and femoral anteversion by age at surgery ± 6 years, sex, body mass index ± 5, acetabular Outerbridge grade (0, 1 vs 2, 3, 4), and iliopsoas fractional lengthening. Results: Sixteen EFABD cases were eligible for inclusion, and 100% follow-up was obtained at ≥2 years postoperatively. Twelve EFABD cases were matched to 24 control cases. Mean femoral version was 22.4° in the EFABD group and 10.2° in the control group ( P = .01). Mean lateral center-edge angle was 22.1° in the EFABD group and 31.5° in the control group ( P < .0001). Acetabuloplasty was performed significantly more frequently in the control group ( P = .0006). No other significant differences were found regarding demographics, findings, procedures, or preoperative scores. At latest follow-up, the EFABD group demonstrated significantly lower mean modified Harris Hip Score (76.1 vs 85.9; P = .005), Nonarthritic Hip Score (74.8 vs 88.5; P < .0001), Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale (58.3 vs 78.4; P = .02), and patient satisfaction (7.1 vs 8.3; P = .005). There were 4 secondary surgical procedures (33.3%) in the EFABD group and 1 (4.2%) in the control group ( P = .03). One patient in each group required arthroplasty. Conclusion: Patients treated with arthroscopic labral preservation and capsular closure in the setting of EFABD demonstrated significant improvements from presurgery to latest follow-up. However, their results are significantly inferior when compared with a matched-controlled group. Consideration of periacetabular osteotomy or femoral osteotomy may be warranted in the setting of EFABD to achieve optimal benefit.

High Rate of Return to Running for Athletes After Hip Arthroscopy for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement and Capsular Plication

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Levy ◽  
Benjamin D. Kuhns ◽  
Rachel M. Frank ◽  
Jeffrey S. Grzybowski ◽  
Kirk A. Campbell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Case Series ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Capsular Plication ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score

Background: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is most commonly diagnosed in athletes who sustain repetitive flexion loading to their hips. No studies to date have focused solely on patients’ return-to-running ability after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To evaluate patients’ ability to return to running after hip arthroscopy for FAI and capsular plication. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Clinical data were retrospectively retrieved for 51 consecutive patients with FAI (22 men, 29 women) who had undergone hip arthroscopy for the treatment of FAI and identified themselves as recreational or competitive runners on intake forms. Two-year outcome measures included the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Sport-Specific (HOS-SS) subscales. A postoperative return-to-running survey was used to obtain running-specific information. Results: Patient age and body mass index (BMI) were a mean (±SD) of 26.3 ± 7.8 years and 23.7 ± 3.3 kg/m2, respectively. Before surgery, patients had refrained from running because of pain for a mean of 8.1 ± 5.7 months. After surgery, 48 patients (94%) returned to running at a mean of 8.5 ± 4.2 months. Patients who had discontinued running for more than 8 months before surgery had a longer return-to-running time than did those who had stopped for less than 8 months (10.6 ± 4.2 vs 7.6 ± 4.1 months; P = .01). After 2 years, mean preoperative distance had decreased significantly ( P < .01) from 9.5 ± 6.5 miles per week when healthy to 6.4 ± 5.8 miles postoperatively. Despite decreased mileage, all 2-year outcomes scores improved significantly ( P < .001). Conclusion: Recreational and competitive runners with FAI returned to running 94% of the time at a mean of 8.5 months after hip arthroscopy. However, runners should be counseled before their surgery that they may run fewer miles than when they were pain free. Additionally, patients with a higher BMI and/or longer preoperative lull may have a longer recovery time.

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.

scholarly journals Does the Use of Psychotropic Medication Adversely Affect the Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy?

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (14) ◽  
pp. 3423-3428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvester T. Youlo ◽  
Brian E. Walczak ◽  
James S. Keene
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
Psychotropic Medications ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
The Past ◽  
Poor Outcomes ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score

Background: Over the past decade, the use of psychotropic medications (PTMs) in the United States has doubled, and currently 20% of adults are taking 1 or more of these antidepressant, antianxiety, antipsychotic, or mood-altering medications. To date, however, the incidence of PTM use in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy and the results of hip arthroscopy in these patients have not been reported. Purpose: To determine the prevalence of PTM use in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy and to compare the outcomes of patients taking PTMs versus those of patients not taking PTMs. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Medical records of 880 consecutive patients who underwent hip arthroscopy performed by the senior author were reviewed and data were collected, including the number and types of PTMs that these patients were taking at the time of their hip arthroscopy. All hips were assessed with the Byrd modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) preoperatively; 709 patients (81%) had scores obtained at 12 months and 669 patients (76%) at 24 months after surgery. Demographic data and mHHS of patients taking psychotropic medications (PTM group) were compared with those of patients not taking PTMs (NPTM group). Results: Four hundred twenty-two (48%) of the 880 patients studied were taking PTMs at the time of their hip arthroscopy; significant differences between the PTM and NPTM groups were average age (48 vs 35 years, respectively), and the high percentage of females (53%) and low percentage of males (38%) in the PTM group. Preoperative scores for the PTM and NPTM groups were similar (41 vs 42 points, respectively), but postoperative scores of the PTM group were significantly lower at 6 months (72 vs 89 points), 12 months (77 vs 91 points), and 24 months (79 vs 88 points) after surgery ( P = .01). In contrast, the scores of the subgroups of PTM and NPTM adolescents obtained at 3 months (92.5 vs 88.9 points), 6 months (92.1 vs 90.3 points), 12 months (89.5 vs 92.1 points), and 24 months (90.3 vs 90.1 points) after surgery did not significantly differ. Conclusion: The incidence of PTM use in this series of patients with hip arthroscopy was triple that reported for US adults (48% vs 17%, respectively) and adolescents (23% vs 6.3%), and the PTM group had significantly lower 12- and 24-month mHHS results than the NPTM group. These results suggest that (1) patients undergoing hip arthroscopy who are taking PTMs are at significantly higher risk for poor outcomes and (2) their use of PTMs should be identified and addressed before proceeding with hip arthroscopy.

An Iliopsoas Impingement Lesion in the Absence of Painful Internal Snapping May Not Require Iliopsoas Fractional Lengthening

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (11) ◽  
pp. 2747-2754
Author(s):  
Mitchell B. Meghpara ◽  
Rishika Bheem ◽  
Samantha C. Diulus ◽  
Philip J. Rosinsky ◽  
Jacob Shapira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Matching Process ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score ◽  
Pain Patients

Background: Iliopsoas impingement (IPI) has been associated with a distinct lesion on the anterior labrum. Iliopsoas fractional lengthening (IFL) can treat IPI in instances of painful internal snapping (PIS) and mechanical groin pain. Purpose: To report minimum 2-year outcomes of patients without PIS who had an IPI lesion diagnosed intraoperatively that did not undergo IFL (+IPI –PIS –IFL) as compared with a matched group of patients with PIS and an IPI lesion that was treated with IFL (+IPI +PIS +IFL). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data on all patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between May 2009 and June 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they underwent hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement–related pathology, an IPI lesion was diagnosed intraoperatively, and they had minimum 2-year postoperative scores for the following: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), iHOT-12 (International Hip Outcome Tool–12), patient satisfaction, and visual analog score (VAS) for pain. Patients were propensity score matched based on the following criteria: age, body mass index, follow-up time, sex, labral treatment, femoroplasty, and acetabuloplasty. Results: A total of 412 hips were eligible for the current study, of which 336 (81.6%) had 2-year follow-up. The matching process established 37 hips in the +IPI –PIS –IFL group and 87 hips in the +IPI +PIS +IFL group. Both groups experienced significant improvements from presurgery to latest follow-up for all recorded patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The +IPI –PIS –IFL group compared favorably with the +IPI +PIS +IFL group for mHHS (86.0 vs 86.1; P = .53), NAHS (83.0 vs 84.7; P = .40), and HOS-SSS (78.1 vs 76.5; P = .87). Additionally, iHOT-12, VAS, patient satisfaction, and rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference for mHHS, NAHS, and HOS-SSS were similar between groups at the latest follow-up. Conclusion: Patients without PIS who were diagnosed with an IPI lesion intraoperatively and did not undergo IFL had similar and favorable improvements in PROs, VAS, and satisfaction to a matched cohort with PIS who had IFL performed. Thus, an IPI lesion in the absence of PIS may not require IFL.

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.

Does the Modified Harris Hip Score Reflect Patient Satisfaction After Hip Arthroscopy?

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (11) ◽  
pp. 2557-2560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Aprato ◽  
Narlaka Jayasekera ◽  
Richard N. Villar
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score ◽  
A Prospective Study

Background: No published studies have explored the relationship between commonly reported clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To compare the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) with patient satisfaction in a prospective study over a 2-year period. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We reviewed our institutional database for prospectively collected mHHS and patient satisfaction data from 697 patients. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years after surgery. Results: The mHHS correlated with patient satisfaction at 1 year ( P < .001, Pearson R = 0.451) and at 2 years ( P < .001, Pearson R = .454). Considering scores from excellent to good as positive results and from fair to poor as negative results, sensitivity was 73% at 1 year and 77% at 2 years. Respectively, the specificity was 64% and 73%, positive predictive value 86% and 91%, negative predictive value 45% and 46%, and accuracy 71% and 76%. At 1- and 2-year follow-up, a respective 55% and 54% of patients with fair to poor mHHS were satisfied with the outcome of hip arthroscopy. In contrast, for those patients with an excellent to good mHHS at 1 and 2 years after surgery, 14% and 9%, respectively, were dissatisfied with their outcome. Conclusion: Our results show a correlation between patient satisfaction and the mHHS but also demonstrate a limitation of the mHHS as an outcome measure in the prediction of patient satisfaction. Further investigation is required to assess factors beyond current standard orthopaedic clinical outcome measures that may influence patient satisfaction after hip arthroscopy.

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.

scholarly journals Return to Play After Hip Arthroscopy Among Tennis Players: Outcomes with Minimum Five-Year Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Maldonado ◽  
Mitchell J. Yelton ◽  
Philip J. Rosinsky ◽  
Jacob Shapira ◽  
Mitchell Meghpara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Cartilage Damage ◽  
Arthroscopic Surgery ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Return To Play ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Tennis Players ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background: Playing tennis is associated with various movements that can lead to labral injuries and may require arthroscopic surgery. While hip arthroscopies have demonstrated good outcomes in athletes, there is limited literature reporting Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) and return to play in competitive or recreational tennis players after hip arthroscopic surgery. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to (1) report minimum five-year PROs and return to sport in tennis players who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery and (2) compare outcomes between recreational and competitive tennis players.Methods: Data for patients who underwent hip arthroscopy surgery in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and labral tears between March 2009 and January 2014 and who played tennis at any level within one-year of surgery were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with preoperative and minimum five-year postoperative scores for the following PROs were included: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Patients with preoperative Tönnis osteoarthritis Grade >1, Workers’ Compensation claims, age > 60 years old, or previous ipsilateral hip surgeries or conditions were excluded. Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) and Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for mHHS and HOS-SSS were calculated. Results: Of 28 patients, 31 hips met all inclusion and exclusion criteria of which 28 (90.3%) had minimum 5-year follow-up (mean: 72.8 ± 13.9 months). There were 3 professional, 3 collegiate, 2 high school, 2 organized amateur, and 18 recreational level tennis players. All PROs significantly improved at latest follow-up: mHHS from 67.0 to 86.7 (P < 0.001), NAHS from 65.9 to 87.2 (P < 0.001), HOS-SSS from 50.0 to 77.9 (P = 0.009), and VAS from 5.4 to 1.8 (P < 0.001). There was a 75.0% return to sport rate. Additionally, 66.7% of patients achieved MCID and 83.3% achieved PASS for mHHS, and 63.6% achieved MCID and 58.3% achieved PASS for HOS-SSS.Conclusion: Regardless of the level of participation, tennis players who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery reported statistically significant PRO improvements. A favorable rate of return to sport was also achieved by players with a continued interest in playing. The severity of cartilage damage was shown to not influence rate of returned to sport nor PROs in this population. The data here may be useful in counseling tennis players of various levels who are considering arthroscopic treatment of a hip injury. Level of Evidence: IV

scholarly journals Treatment of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement

Joints ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 03 (02) ◽  
pp. 67-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gennaro Fiorentino ◽  
Alberto Fontanarosa ◽  
Riccardo Cepparulo ◽  
Alberto Guardoli ◽  
Luca Berni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Arthroscopic Treatment ◽  
Correct Selection ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Radiographic Examination ◽  
Level Of Evidence

Purpose: the aim of this study was to evaluate preliminary clinical and radiographic results of arthroscopic treatment of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Methods: thirty-eight patients underwent hip arthroscopy for cam-type FAI between 2009 and 2012. Preoperative assessment was based on clinical examination, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and radiographic examination with anteroposterior pelvis, frogleg and Lequesne views. The patients’ clinical conditions at follow-up were assessed using the mHHS administered as a telephone survey. Radiographic outcome measurements evaluated pre and postoperatively were the alpha angle and femoral head-neck offset. Results: the patients were clinically evaluated at a mean follow-up of 36 months. Radiographic follow-up was performed at an average of 12.7 months. Thirty of the 38 patients (79%) were satisfied with the results of the arthroscopic procedure. A total of nine patients subsequently underwent a total hip replacement. All 30 patients who declared themselves satisfied recorded an mHHS increase; in particular, the mHHS increased from a mean of 52.9 preoperatively (range: 27.5-82.5) to a mean of 85.6 postoperatively (range: 45.1-100.1). Three significant differences between the two groups of patients (satisfied and not satisfied) were recorded: mean age, alpha angle and BMI were all significantly greater in the patients who were not satisfied with the treatment. Conclusions: a crucial aspect in order to obtain good clinical outcomes of arthroscopic treatment of camtype impingement is correct selection of patients who are likely to benefit from this kind of surgery. Hip arthroscopy should be avoided in patients aged over 50 years with risk factors for early osteoarthritis (high BMI and a significantly increased alpha angle). Level of evidence: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document