Rescue Pericapsular Nerve Group Block for Hip Arthroscopy: A Report of 3 Cases

2022 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. e01553
Author(s):  
Sakura Kinjo ◽  
Alan L. Zhang
Keyword(s):  
2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
Charles N. Brooks ◽  
Richard E. Strain ◽  
James B. Talmage

Abstract The primary function of the acetabular labrum, like that of the glenoid, is to deepen the socket and improve joint stability. Tears of the acetabular labrum are common in older adults but occur in all age groups and with equal frequency in males and females. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, is silent about rating tears, partial or complete excision, or repair of the acetabular labrum. Provocative tests to detect acetabular labrum tears involve hip flexion and rotation; all rely on production of pain in the groin (typically), clicking, and/or locking with passive or active hip motions. Diagnostic tests or procedures rely on x-rays, conventional arthrography, computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA), and hip arthroscopy. Hip arthroscopy is the gold standard for diagnosis but is the most invasive and most likely to result in complications, and MRA is about three times more sensitive and accurate in detecting acetabular labral tears than MRI alone. Surgical treatment for acetabular labrum tears usually consists of arthroscopic debridement; results tend to be better in younger patients. In general, an acetabular labral tear, partial labrectomy, or labral repair warrants a rating of 2% lower extremity impairment. Evaluators should avoid double dipping (eg, using both a Diagnosis-related estimates and limited range-of-motion tests).


2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002199626
Author(s):  
Oliver Eberhardt ◽  
Thekla von Kalle ◽  
Rebecca Matthis ◽  
Richard Doepner ◽  
Thomas Wirth ◽  
...  

Introduction: It is often difficult to clinically and radiologically diagnose intra-articular osteoid osteomas and osteoid osteomas of the hip joint. Treatment can also be difficult due to complex locational relationships. CT-guided radiofrequency ablation is currently the standard form of treatment. In this paper we report on a minimally-invasive concept for treating osteoid osteomas near the hip joint in children and adolescents which does not involve using computed tomography. Material and method: 10 patients with an average age of 12.1 years underwent treatment for osteoid osteomas in the hip joint region. The diagnosis was made using a contrast-enhanced MRI. The osteoid osteomas were marked percutaneously using x-ray and MRI guidance. MRI-guided drilling/curettage was performed in 4 cases and arthroscopic resection in 6 cases. Results: All lesions were successfully treated using the MRI-guided method. All patients were free of pain after the treatment. There was no instance of recurrence during the follow-up period, which averaged 10 months. The effective dose for marking the lesion was between 0.0186 mSv and 0.342 mSV (mean 0.084 mSV). Conclusions: Our MRI diagnostics protocol, the MRI-guided drilling and the minimally invasive hip arthroscopy represent an alternative to CT-guided radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of osteoid osteomas. Radiation exposure can thereby be significantly reduced. Hip arthroscopy can also be used to treat secondary pathologies such as femoroacetabular impingement.


2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652199382
Author(s):  
Mario Hevesi ◽  
Devin P. Leland ◽  
Philip J. Rosinsky ◽  
Ajay C. Lall ◽  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
...  

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 232596712098198
Author(s):  
Ryan P. McGovern ◽  
John J. Christoforetti ◽  
Benjamin R. Kivlan ◽  
Shane J. Nho ◽  
Andrew B. Wolff ◽  
...  

Background: While previous studies have established several techniques for suture anchor repair of the acetabular labrum to bone during arthroscopic surgery, the current literature lacks evidence defining the appropriate number of suture anchors required to effectively restore the function of the labral tissue. Purpose/Hypothesis: To define the location and size of labral tears identified during hip arthroscopy for acetabular labral treatment in a large multicenter cohort. The secondary purpose was to differentiate the number of anchors used during arthroscopic labral repair. The hypothesis was that the location and size of the labral tear as well as the number of anchors identified would provide a range of fixation density per acetabular region and fixation method to be used as a guide in performing arthroscopic repair. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We used a multicenter registry of prospectively collected hip arthroscopy cases to find patients who underwent arthroscopic labral repair by 1 of 7 orthopaedic surgeons between January 2015 and January 2017. The tear location and number of anchors used during repair were described using the clockface method, where 3 o’clock denoted the anterior extent of the tear and 9 o’clock the posterior extent, regardless of sidedness (left or right). Tear size was denoted as the number of “hours” spanned per clockface arc. Chi-square and univariate analyses of variance were performed to evaluate the data for both the entire group and among surgical centers. Results: A total of 1978 hips underwent arthroscopic treatment of the acetabular labrum; the most common tear size had a 3-hour span (n = 820; 41.5%). Of these hips, 1645 received labral repair, with most common repair location at the 12- to 3-o’clock position (n = 537; 32.6%). The surgeons varied in number of anchors per repair according to labral size ( P < .001 for all), using 1 to 1.6 anchors for 1-hour tears, 1.7 to 2.4 anchors for 2-hour tears, 2.1 to 3.2 anchors for 3-hour tears, and 2.2 to 4.1 for 4-hour tears. Conclusion: Variation existed in the number of anchor implants per tear size. When labral repair involved a mean clockface arc >2 hours, at least 2 anchor points were fixated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document