Save the torn labrum in hips with borderline acetabular coverage

A retrospective study of arthroscopic treatment for patients with bordline developmental dysplasia of the hip

PURPOSE

Hip arthroscopy is effective in treating bordline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH), but there are only a few clinical reports in China, and its postoperative failure rate is still a problem that cannot be ignored. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical effect of hip arthroscopy in BDDH treatment in China and to explore the risk factors influencing the efficacy of hip arthroscopy in BDDH treatment.

METHODS

All of 22 cases of BDDH treated with arthroscopy in our hospital from November March 2017 to February 2022 were analyzed retrospectively, including ten males and 12 females, with an average age of 34.7 ± 9.5 years (19-53 years). All patients underwent arthroscopic treatment with acetabular plasty, labral repair, femoral osteoplasty, and capsular plication. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), modified Harris Hip Scores (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) were measured before operation and at the follow-up, and statistical analysis was performed. The Minimum clinically significant difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were also obtained.

RESULTS

22 patients were followed up, and the follow-up time was ≥ one year, with an average of 21.4 ± 8.2 months. The VAS score decreased from 5.27 ± 1.58 points before surgery to 1.96 ± 0.92 points at the follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (t = 9.05,P < 0.001). The mHHS score increased from 64.84 ± 13.58 points before surgery to 90.4 ± 10.11 points at the follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (t=-7.07, P < 0.001). The HOS-ADL score increased from 68.92 ± 11.76 points before surgery to 88.91 ± 9.51 points at the follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (t=-8.15,P < 0.001). The iHOT-12 score increased from 49.32 ± 12.01 points before surgery to 79.61 ± 15.89 points at the follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (t=-7.66,P < 0.001). The MCID (mHHS) and MCID (HOS-ADL) were 81.8% and 77.3% respectively, and the PASS (mHHS) and PASS (HOS-ADL) were 86.4% and 72.7% respectively at the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Hip arthroscopy can achieve good short-term outcomes in the treatment of BDDH.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV Therapeutic Study.

Risk Factors for Failure of Hip Arthroscopy in Patients with Borderline Dysplasia include a Tönnis angle ≥ 15 degrees, Age ≥ 40-42 years, Female Sex, Anterior Wall Index < 0.35, Labral Debridement, and Preexisting Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to determine potential risk factors for failure of hip arthroscopy (HA) in patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify English language clinical studies reporting on patients with BHD undergoing HA from 2003 to 2023. The search terms used were: (borderline OR mild) AND hip AND (arthroscopy OR dysplasia) AND failure. The primary outcomes assessed were risk factors reported by each study for failure of a HA-only approach in BHD patients.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (8 level III, 6 level IV) met inclusion criteria, totaling 749 hips. Patient age ranged from 29.8 to 39.2 years with a mean follow-up ranging from 24.0 to 144.0 months. The overall percentage of females ranged from 11.8 to 100.0%. Overall, the clinical failure rate ranged from 0 to 53.3% and the reoperation rate ranged from 0 to 44.0%. The predominant predictors of poor outcomes following HA alone included Tönnis angle ≥ 15°, age ≥ 40-42 years at surgery, and female sex. Other risk factors for failure were preoperative clinical arthritis, grade 3 or 4 articular cartilage changes to the femoral head or acetabulum, an anterior wall index (AWI) < 0.35, and labral debridement. Revision procedures performed included revision HA (n=88, 0-28.0%), total hip arthroplasty (n=55, 0-23.7%), and endoscopic shelf acetabuloplasty (n=5, 0-11.0%). One study included an additional 9 patients converting to either PAO or total hip arthroplasty (THA) without distinguishing between the two.

CONCLUSION

For patients with BHD, Tönnis angle ≥ 15°, age ≥ 40-42 years at surgery, female sex, AWI < 0.35, labral debridement, and preexisting hip osteoarthritis are common risk factors for treatment failure following isolated HA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, systematic review of level III-IV studies.

Clinical Outcomes of the Arthroscopic Capsular Suture-Lifting Technique in the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Patients With Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip

Background

Patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) are likely to present with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH). Considering the prolonged risk of negative prognosis in these patients, the need for surgical management of the capsule has been emphasized. Although previous studies have advocated different techniques of capsular closure during surgery, no consensus has been achieved. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a new arthroscopic capsular suture-lifting technique for the treatment of FAI combined with BDDH.

Hypothesis

The arthroscopic capsular suture-lifting technique would achieve better anterior stability and show better clinical outcomes compared with routine capsular closure.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Consecutive patients diagnosed with FAI and BDDH and who underwent hip arthroscopy in our hospital between September 1, 2017, and April 30, 2021, were evaluated. Data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the capsule closure methods used: capsular suture-lifting technique (lifting group) and routine capsular closure (control group). Anteroposterior hip radiography, Dunn view radiography, and computed tomography imaging were carried out for all patients preoperatively and postoperatively. Patient-reported outcomes, including the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, were collected preoperatively and at least 1 year after surgery and compared between the 2 groups. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to evaluate changes in preoperative to postoperative mHHS scores and VAS. Mann-Whitney U test was used to evaluate significant differences in postoperative mHHS and VAS scores in the 2 groups.

Results

In all, 144 patients were included in this study, of whom 77 (53.5%) underwent the arthroscopic capsular suture-lifting technique and 67 (46.5%) underwent routine arthroscopic surgery. The patients in both groups had significant improvement in postoperative mHHS and VAS compared with the preoperative assessment (P < .05). The postoperative VAS score of patients in the suture-lifting group was significantly lower (2.6 vs 3.8; P < .05) and the mHHS score was significantly higher (75.2 vs 68.5; P < .05) than those of patients in the control group. Of the 77 patients in the suture-lifting group, 68 (88.3%) surpassed the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and 49 (63.6%) achieved the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS). Of the 67 patients in the control group, 26 (38.8%) surpassed MCID and 32 (47.8%) achieved PASS. The percentage of patients achieving MCID and PASS in the suture-lifting group was significantly greater than that in the control group (P = .007 for MCID; P = .03 for PASS).

Conclusion

The study demonstrated that the arthroscopic capsular suture-lifting technique provided good clinical outcomes in the treatment of patients with FAI combined with BDDH. This technique showed better improvement of postoperative clinical outcomes than routine capsular closure.

Primary Hip Arthroscopy in Patients With Acetabular Dysplasia: A Systematic Review of Published Clinical Outcomes at Minimum 5-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroscopy in patients with borderline hip dysplasia has satisfactory outcomes at short-term follow-up; however, the data on midterm outcomes are inconsistent, and failure rates are high in some studies, limiting understanding of the role and utility of hip arthroscopy in this patient cohort.

PURPOSE

To provide an up-to-date, evidence-based review of the clinical outcomes of primary hip arthroscopy in patients with frank or borderline hip dysplasia at ≥5-year follow-up and report the failure rate and progression to total hip arthroplasty in this cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated outcomes of primary hip arthroscopy in patients with lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) <25° at ≥5-year follow-up. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies scoring system. Level of evidence was determined using criteria from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in this review. Patients with LCEA <25° demonstrated satisfactory clinical outcomes, high patient satisfaction, and significant postoperative improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at follow-up ranging from a ≥5 to 10 years. Studies comparing patients with dysplasia to those without did not demonstrate significant differences in preoperative, postoperative, or delta PROs or in failure, reoperation, or revision rates. There was no overall significant correlation between outcomes and LCEA stratification.

CONCLUSION

Hip arthroscopy in carefully selected patients with LCEA <25° can be successful at mid- to long-term follow-up and may provide clinical outcomes and failure rates comparable with patients with normal LCEA, understanding that this is a singular, 2-dimensional radiographic measure that does not differentiate instability from impingement or combinations thereof, warranting future studies delineating these differences. These findings suggest that hip dysplasia may not be an absolute contraindication for isolated hip arthroscopy and may serve as a viable intervention with consideration of staged future periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Importantly, this review does not suggest that hip arthroscopy alters the natural history of dysplasia; therefore, patients with dysplasia should be counseled on the potential utility of PAO by appropriate hip preservation specialists.

High-Level Athletes With Borderline Hip Dysplasia Achieve Favorable Outcomes and Return to Sport Rates Following Primary Hip Arthroscopy: Minimum 5-Year Outcomes Comparison to a Propensity-Matched Control Group

PURPOSE

(1) To report minimum 5-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and return to sport (RTS) rates in high-level athletes with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) following primary hip arthroscopy for labral pathology and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and (2) to compare results to a propensity-matched control group of athletes with normal acetabular coverage.

METHODS

Data were reviewed for surgeries performed between February 2009 and February 2016. Patients were eligible if they underwent primary hip arthroscopy in the setting of BHD (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] 18-25°) and competed in professional, collegiate, or high school sports. Inclusion criteria were preoperative and minimum 5-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritis Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale for pain. Rates of achieving the minimal clinically importance difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), and maximum outcome improvement satisfaction threshold (MOIST) were recorded in addition to RTS. BHD athletes were matched by age at the time of surgery, sex, body mass index, Tönnis grade, follow-up time, sport type, and competition level to a control group of 58 athletes with normal acetabular coverage (LCEA 25°-40°) for comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 34 BHD athletes were included with a mean follow-up of 73.6 ± 10.7 months. BHD athletes showed significant improvements in all PROs, demonstrated high RTS rates (90.0%), and achieved PASS/MCID/MOIST for mHHS (MCID: 80.0%, PASS: 93.3%, MOIST: 80.0%) and HOS-SSS (MCID: 76.7%, PASS: 73.3%) at high rates. When compared to a propensity-matched group with normal acetabular coverage, BHD athletes demonstrated similar postoperative PROs, rates of achieving psychometric thresholds, and RTS rates (P > .05). Additionally, by the latest follow-up, no athlete in either group required conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

High-level athletes with BHD undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for labral pathology and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome may expect favorable midterm outcomes and high RTS rates. These results were comparable to a control group of athletes with normal coverage.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Outcomes of Periacetabular Osteotomy for Borderline Acetabular Dysplasia

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical treatment (hip arthroscopy compared with periacetabular osteotomy [PAO]) for borderline acetabular dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA], 18° to 25°) remains a topic of debate. To date, the literature has focused primarily on arthroscopy outcomes, with only a few small reports on PAO outcomes. The purpose of this study was to define PAO outcomes in a large cohort of borderline hips. In a secondary analysis, we assessed the effect of prior failed arthroscopy, concurrent hip arthroscopy, and concurrent femoral osteoplasty on PAO outcomes in this cohort.

METHODS

A prospective database was retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent PAO for symptomatic instability in the setting of borderline dysplasia (LCEA, 18° to 25°). Of the 232 identified hips, 186 (80.2%) were assessed at a mean follow-up of 3.3 ± 2.0 years postoperatively. The mean patient age was 25.2 ± 8.5 years (range, 14 to 45 years), and 88.2% were female. Thirty hips (16.1%) had undergone a failed prior arthroscopy. Arthroscopy was performed concurrently with the PAO in 130 hips (69.9%), and femoral osteoplasty was performed concurrently in 120 hips (64.5%). The modified Harris hip score (mHHS) was assessed relative to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 8 and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) of 74. Clinical failure was defined as a reoperation for persistent symptoms or a failure to achieve either the mHHS MCID or PASS.

RESULTS

Of the 156 hips undergoing a primary surgical procedure, clinical success was achieved in 148 hips (94.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 90.2% to 97.4%]). Two hips (1.3% [95% CI, 0.4% to 4.6%]) underwent reoperation (hip arthroscopy) for persistent symptoms and an additional 6 hips (3.8% [95% CI, 1.8% to 8.1%]) failed to achieve the mHHS MCID or PASS, for a clinical failure rate of 5.1% (95% CI, 2.6% to 9.8%); 8.8% reported dissatisfaction with the surgical procedure. Clinical failure was more frequent among the 30 hips (23.3% [95% CI, 11.8% to 40.9%]; p = 0.001) that had undergone a prior failed arthroscopy. There were no outcome differences between hips that had or had not undergone concurrent hip arthroscopy or femoral osteoplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates excellent early outcomes of PAO for borderline acetabular dysplasia, with significant clinical improvement in 94.9% of patients undergoing a primary surgical procedure; 91.2% were satisfied with the surgical procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The association the patient-reported outcomes after periacetabular osteotomy with radiographic features: a short-term retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Bernese periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is an effective treatment for patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). PAO has been widely used in China, but few follow-up outcomes have been reported in the international community. Moreover, the risk factors affecting patient-reported outcomes have not been discussed in recent studies. In this study, patient-reported outcomes after PAO were reported, and risk factors affecting patient-reported outcomes were analyzed.

METHODS

Patients who underwent PAO for DDH from January 2014 to January 2020 were selected as the study subjects, and 66 hips were included in the analysis after screening (59 patients, with an average follow-up time of 3.01 years). The Harris Hip Score (HHS) and International Hip Outcome Instrument-12 (iHOT-12) were used to assess hip function and patient quality of life. The changes of preoperative and latest follow-up HHSs less than 9 were defined as symptomatic hips, that is, an adverse outcome; otherwise, the score indicates preserved hips. Also, the changes of preoperative and latest follow-up iHOT-12 were defined as symptomatic hips and preserved hips. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to predict the risk factors influencing the patient-reported outcomes, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed on the risk factors to determine their sensitivity, specificity and cutoff value.

RESULTS

Clinical outcome analysis demonstrates marked improvements in patient-reported outcomes. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that when the postoperative LCEA was > 38°, adverse outcomes were much more likely. However, a Tönnis angle of - 10° to 0° was a protective factor. In addition, hips with fair or poor joint congruency were more likely to develop negative outcomes. The ROC curve analysis showed that the optimal thresholds for the LCEA and Tönnis angles used to predict outcomes after PAO were 38.2° and - 9°, respectively. Based on the results of the ROC curve analysis, among hips with poor or fair joint congruency preoperatively treated by surgeons who obtained the improper postoperative LCEAs and Tönnis angles, bad patient-reported outcomes will most likely be obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate marked improvements in patient-reported outcomes. Among hips with preoperative excellent or good joint congruency treated by experienced surgeons who obtain the proper postoperative LCEA and Tönnis angles, good patient-reported outcomes can be expected.

Defining the Gothic Arch Angle (GAA) as a radiographic diagnostic tool for instability in hip dysplasia

In recent years, there has been a controversial discussion about whether borderline dysplastic hips should be treated with an arthroscopic procedure or rather with an acetabular reorientation. New research suggests that a classification into stable and unstable hips may be helpful. The aim of the study was to validate (1) the intra- and interobserver reliability of a newly defined radiographic parameter named the Gothic Arch Angle, (2) the association between the GAA and previously existing measurements used to define severity of acetabular dysplasia, and (3) the correlation between radiographic measurements of acetabular dysplasia with MRI findings previously suggestive of hip instability. We defined and validated the GAA in 10 standardized radiographs of asymptomatic hips by two observers and calculated intra- and interobserver coefficients at two individual dates. Subsequently, a consecutive series of 100 patients with dysplastic hips (LCEA < 25°, Toennis grade ≤ 1) were evaluated for signs of instability on anteroposterior (a.p.) pelvic radiographs and direct MR arthrography and were divided in two groups: stable and unstable. In these patients the LCEA, the AI, the FEAR index and the GAA were radiographically evaluated. Correlation analyses and a logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictive value of instability for each radiographic parameter. Cutoff probabilities analysis was performed using standard receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to rate the predictive efficiency value of the GAA. The GAA showed excellent inter- and intraobserver reliability. A correlation was found between GAA and FEAR index. A logistic regression analysis showed that LCEA, FEAR index and GAA are distinct predictors of instability in hip dysplasia. The GAA showed the largest area under the curve (AUC 0.96), indicating it to be the best predictor of instability with an optimal cutoff value of 90° (sensitivity, 0.95; specificity, 0.93). The GAA is a new available indicator for instability and is thus suggested to be used as a future radiographic parameter for the stability of dysplastic hips. Further studies are needed to understand how this parameter might additionally predict clinical outcome in the treatment of hip dysplasia.

Level of evidence: Level III, diagnostic study.

Femoroacetabular Impingement and Labral Tear: From the Most Highly Cited Articles to Research Interests

Objective

To highlight the characteristics of the most highly cited articles and propose the research interests over the past decades in the field of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and labral tear.

Methods

The ISI Web of Science database (Clarivate Analytics, New York, the United States) was utilized for the identification of articles on 15 December 2020. FAI and labral tear‐related articles (1138 articles) were retrieved, of which the 100 most‐cited articles (top 100) were identified. Subsequent analysis included citation density (citations/article age), authorship, institution, journal, geographic distribution, level of evidence, and theme.

Results

The number of citations per article ranged from 66 to 1189 with a mean of 163.31. The majority of articles were published in the United States (all articles/top 100 = 655/57) and Switzerland (85/22). University of Bern (n = 10) was the most prolific institution. The journal with the most of articles was Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery. The most prolific coauthor (all articles) or first authors (top 100) was Domb (n = 109) and Philippon (n = 6), respectively. The evidence with the most articles is level IV (n = 41). The top three most popular topics of research article were outcomes of surgery (n = 23), imaging diagnosis (n = 18), and comparison of surgery (n = 8). The top four most prevalent themes of review were labral tears (n = 3), FAI (n = 3), comparison of surgery imaging diagnosis, and outcomes of surgery (both n = 2). Six keywords with the newest average publication year, including FAI syndrome (average publication year = 2019.50), patient‐reported outcomes (2019.43), femoroplasty (2018.60), clinical outcomes (2018.17), borderline dysplasia (2018.00), and capsule (2018.00). Five keywords with the highest average citations, including outcome (average citations = 88.50), alpha angle (58.00), complications (55.86), revision hip arthroscopy (49.00), and systematic review (46.14).

Conclusions

Outcomes research is the most popular research interest and patient‐reported outcome instruments might be further and widely used in the emerging articles in the near future. The field of FAI and labral tear has shown an obvious trend of development and is steadily evolving. It could be predicted that there will be an increasing number of publications in the following years, with the United States and Switzerland maintaining leadership in this field.

Achieving Successful Outcomes in High-Level Athletes With Borderline Hip Dysplasia Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy With Capsular Plication and Labral Preservation: A Propensity-Matched Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Return to sports (RTS) rates and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after hip arthroscopy in athletes with borderline dysplasia (BD) have not been established.

PURPOSE

(1) To report minimum 2-year PROs and RTS rates in high-level athletes with BD who underwent hip arthroscopy for labral pathology in the setting of microinstability and (2) to compare clinical results with those of a matched control group of athletes with normal acetabular coverage.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Data were reviewed for surgery performed between January 2012 and July 2018. Patients were considered eligible if they received a primary hip arthroscopy in the setting of BD (lateral center-edge angle, 18°-25°) and competed in professional, collegiate, or high school sports. Inclusion criteria included preoperative and minimum 2-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score, Non-arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale for pain. Athletes with BD were matched to a control group of athletes with normal acetabular coverage (lateral center-edge angle, 25°-40°).

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients with BD were included in the study with a mean ± standard deviation follow-up of 47.5 ± 20.4 months. Athletes with BD showed significant improvement in all outcome measures recorded, demonstrated high RTS rates (80.7%), and achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale at high rates (MCID, 90.8%; PASS, 75.4%). When compared with a propensity-matched control group with normal acetabular coverage, capsular plication was performed more commonly in the BD group (93.8% vs 82.7%; P = .037). PROs and RTS, PASS, and MCID rates were similar between the BD and control groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

High-level athletes with BD who undergo primary hip arthroscopy for labral pathology in the setting of microinstability may expect favorable PROs and RTS rates at minimum 2-year follow-up. These results were comparable with those of a control group of athletes with normal coverage.

Can the Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof (FEAR) Index Be Used to Distinguish Dysplasia from Impingement?

BACKGROUND

Classifying hips with structural deformity on the spectrum from impingement to dysplasia is often subjective and frequently inexact. Currently used radiographic measures may inaccurately predict a hip's morphological stability in borderline hips. A recently described radiographic measure, the Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof (FEAR) index, has demonstrated an ability to predict stability in the borderline hip. This measure is attractive to clinicians because procedures can be used on the basis of a hip's pathomechanics. This study was designed to further validate and characterize the FEAR index in a skeletally immature population, in hips with dysplasia/femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), and in asymptomatic hips.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What are the characteristics of the FEAR index in children and how does the index change with skeletal maturation? (2) How does the FEAR index correlate with clinical diagnosis and surgical treatment in a large cohort of symptomatic hips and asymptomatic controls? (3) How does the FEAR index correlate with clinical diagnosis in the borderline hip (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] 20°-25°) group?

METHODS

A total of 220 participants with symptomatic investigational hips with a clinical diagnosis of dysplasia or FAI between January 2008 and January 2018 were retrospectively collected from the senior author's practice. Investigational hips were excluded if they had any femoral head abnormalities preventing LCEA measurement (for example, Perthes disease), Tönnis osteoarthritis grade greater than 1, prior hip surgery, or prior femoral osteotomy. In the 220 participants, 395 hips met inclusion criteria. Once exclusion criteria were applied, 15 hips were excluded due to prior hip surgery or prior femoral osteotomy, and 12 hips were excluded due to femoral head deformity. A single hip was then randomly selected from each participant, resulting in 206 investigational hips with a mean age of 13 ± 3 years. Between January 2017 and December 2017, 70 asymptomatic control participants were retrospectively collected from the senior author's institutional trauma database. Control hips were included if the AP pelvis film had the coccyx centered over the pubic symphysis and within 1 to 3 cm of the superior aspect of the symphysis. Control hips were excluded if there was any fracture to the pelvis or ipsilateral femur or the participant had prior hip/pelvis surgery. After exclusion criteria were applied, 16 hips were excluded due to fracture. One hip was then randomly selected from each participant, resulting in 65 control hips with a mean age of 16 ± 8 years. Standardized standing AP pelvis radiographs were used to measure the FEAR index, LCEA, and Tönnis angle in the investigational cohort. Standardized false-profile radiographs were used to measure the anterior center-edge angle (ACEA) in the investigational cohort. Two blinded investigators measured the FEAR index with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92 [95% CI 0.84 to 0.96]. Question 1 was answered by comparing the above radiographic measures in age subgroups (childhood: younger than 10 years; adolescence: 10 to 14 years old; maturity: older than 14 years) of dysplastic, FAI, and control hips. Question 2 was answered by comparing the radiographic measures in all dysplastic, FAI, control hips, and a subgroup of operatively or nonoperatively managed dysplasia and FAI hips. Question 3 was answered by comparing the radiographic measures in borderline (LCEA 20°-25°) dysplastic, FAI, and control hips.

RESULTS

The FEAR index was lower in older dysplastic of hips (younger than 10 years, 6° ± 9°; 10 to 14 years, 4° ± 10°; older than 14 years, 5° ± 9°; p < 0.001) and control hips (younger than 10 years, -6° ± 5°; 10 to 14 years, -15° ± 4°; older than 14 years, -16° ± 7°; p < 0.001). The diagnosis and age groups were independently correlated with the FEAR index (p < 0.001). The relationship between the FEAR index and diagnosis remained consistent in each age group (p = 0.11). The FEAR index was higher in all dysplastic hips (mean 5° ± 10°) than in asymptomatic controls (mean -13° ± 7°; p < 0.001) and FAI hips (mean -10° ± 11°; p < 0.001). Using -1.3° as a cutoff for FAI/control hips and dysplastic hips, 81% (112 of 139) of hips with values below this threshold were FAI/control, and 89% (117 of 132) of hips with values above -1.3° were dysplastic. The receiver operator characteristics area under the curve (ROC-AUC) was 0.91. Similarly, the FEAR index was higher in borderline dysplastic hips than in both asymptomatic borderline controls (p < 0.001) and borderline FAI hips (p < 0.001). Eighty-nine percent (33 of 37) of hips with values below this threshold were FAI/control, and 90% (37 of 41) of hips with values above -1.3° were dysplastic. The ROC-AUC for borderline hips was 0.86.

CONCLUSION

The FEAR index was associated with the diagnosis of hip dysplasia and FAI in a patient cohort with a wide age range and with varying degrees of acetabular deformity. Specifically, a FEAR index greater than -1.3° is associated with a dysplastic hip and a FEAR index less than -1.3° is associated with a hip displaying FAI. Using this reliable, developmentally based radiographic measure may help hip preservation surgeons establish a correct diagnosis and more appropriately guide treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE LEVEL

III, diagnostic study.

Standardizing the Diagnostic Evaluation of Nonarthritic Hip Pain Through the Delphi Method

Background:

Femoroacetabular impingement and acetabular dysplasia have gained increased attention as nonarthritic sources of pain and dysfunction in young, active patients. To date, no standardized approach to the diagnostic evaluation of nonarthritic hip pain has been identified, as previous work has focused on the diagnostic evaluation and management of patients with femoroacetabular impingement undergoing hip arthroscopy.

Purpose:

To explore the standard diagnostic evaluation practice of experts in the field of hip preservation surgery and combine their expertise through the Delphi method to form a standardized approach to the diagnostic evaluation of patients with nonarthritic hip pain.

Study Design:

Consensus statement.

Methods:

An expert panel made up of 18 orthopaedic surgeons with extensive experience in the treatment of nonarthritic hip disorders participated in this Delphi study. The Delphi panelists were presented with 4 clinical vignettes representing a spectrum of patients with nonarthritic hip pain. Three iterative survey rounds were presented to the panelists based on these clinical vignettes, and a 3-step classic Delphi method was used to establish consensus techniques in the diagnostic evaluation of nonarthritic hip pain.

Results:

Total (100%) participation was gained, with all 18 experts completing all 3 Delphi survey rounds. Consensus (≥75% support) was achieved for some, if not all, vignettes for each of the following diagnostic domains: historical features, physical examination, radiographic sequences, radiographic interpretation, cross-sectional imaging, and ancillary diagnostics.

Conclusion:

In this Delphi study, we identified standardized diagnostic treatment approaches as derived from expert opinion for patients with nonarthritic hip pathomorphologies.

Femoral Version in Hip Arthroscopy: Does it Matter?

Femoral version is extremely variable between patients presenting with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Careful and routine measurement of femoral anteversion is essential in comprehensive preoperative planning. In general, low degrees of femoral version can lead to anterior impingement (especially on the subspine and distal medial femoral neck). High degrees of anteversion can be seen in the setting of acetabular dysplasia and can lead to anterior hip instability and or posterior impingement. In this article, the authors will discuss the role of routine femoral version management for optimal outcomes after hip arthroscopy for FAI.

The utility of hip arthroscopy for patients with painful borderline hip dysplasia

PURPOSE

We measured the width of the acetabular labra in, and the clinical outcomes of, patients with borderline hip dysplasia (HD) who underwent arthroscopy.

METHODS

A total of 1436 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy to treat symptomatic, acetabular labral tears were enrolled. From this cohort, we extracted a borderline HD group (162 cases). Lateral labral widths were evaluated using preoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. Clinical data including the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), non-arthritic hip score (NAHS), hip outcome score-activity of daily living (HOS-ADL) score, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and Tönnis grade were collected. In addition, patient satisfaction with arthroscopy outcomes was rated. All complications and reoperations were noted.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 87.4 months. The lateral labral width was 7.64 mm in those with normal hips and 7.73 mm in borderline HD patients, respectively (p = 0.870). The Tönnis grade progressed mildly from 0.46 to 0.76 (p = 0.227). At the last follow-up, clinical outcome scores (mHHS, NAHS, and HOS-ADL scores) and the VAS score were improved (p < 0.001). The mean patient satisfaction was scored at 8.2. The reoperation rate was higher in those who underwent labral debridement (25.6%) than labral repair (4.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

The lateral labral width did not differ significantly between the borderline HD group and the nondysplastic control group. Arthroscopy relieved the symptoms of painful borderline HD and did not accelerate osteoarthritis. Therefore, if such patients do not respond to conservative treatment, hip arthroscopy can be considered for further treatment.

Computed Tomography-Based Three-Dimensional Analyses Show Similarities in Anterosuperior Acetabular Coverage Between Acetabular Dysplasia and Borderline Dysplasia

PURPOSE

(1) To compare the acetabular coverage between dysplasia, borderline dysplasia, and control acetabulum in a quantitative 3-dimensional manner; and (2) to evaluate correlations between the radiologic parameters and the 3-dimensional zonal-acetabular coverage.

METHODS

We reviewed contralateral hip computed tomography images of patients 16 to 60 years of age who underwent 1 of 3 types of surgeries: eccentric rotational acetabular osteotomy, curved intertrochanteric varus osteotomy, and total hip replacement with minimum 1-year follow-up from January 2013 to April 2018. A point-cloud model of the acetabulum created from computed tomography was divided into 6 zones. Three-dimensional acetabular coverage was measured radially at intervals of 1°. Mean radial acetabular coverage for each zone was named ZAC (zonal acetabular coverage) and was compared among the 3 subgroups (control: 25° ≤lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] <40°; borderline: 20° ≤LCEA <25°; and dysplasia: LCEA ≤20°) statistically. Further, the correlations between the ZAC in each zone and the LCEA were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

One-hundred fifteen hips were categorized as control (36 hips), borderline (32 hips), and dysplasia (47 hips). The mean anterocranial ZAC in the borderline (87.5 ± 5.7°) was smaller than that in the control (92.6 ± 5.9°, P = .005) but did not differ compared with the dysplasia (84.5 ± 7.6°, P = .131). In contrast, the anterocaudal (71.2 ± 5.0°), posterocranial (85.0 ± 6.4°), and posterocaudal (82.4 ± 4.5°) mean ZACs in the borderline were not different from those in the control (anterocaudal, 74.3 ± 4.6°, P = .090; posterocranial, 87.9 ± 4.3°, P = .082; posterocaudal, 85.1 ± 5.0°, P = .069) respectively. Although there was a very strong positive correlation with supra-anterior ZAC and LCEA (r = 0.750, P < .001), the correlation between the anterocranial ZAC and LCEA was relatively weak (r = 0.574, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The anterosuperior acetabular coverage in the borderline dysplastic acetabulum is more similar to the dysplastic acetabulum than to the normal acetabulum.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study emphasizes the importance of evaluating not only the lateral but also the anterior coverage in borderline dysplasia.

Three-dimensional hip joint congruity evaluation of the borderline dysplasia: Zonal-acetabular radius of curvature

In theory, a hemispherical acetabulum provides the ideal hip congruity in any hip position. However, it remains unknown how the three-dimensional acetabular morphology of borderline dysplastic and frank dysplastic hips compare to normal hips. This study inquires if borderline dysplastic zonal-acetabular curvatures in the anterior, superior, and posterior zones are different from normal or dysplastic hips three-dimensionally. One-hundred and fifteen hips, grouped as control (25°≤ LCEA <40°), 36 hips; borderline (20°≤ LCEA <25°), 32 hips; dysplasia (LCEA ≤20°), 47 hips were analyzed. The radii of acetabular curvature for the anterior, superior, and posterior zones were calculated as the zonal-acetabular radius of curvature (ZARC). The mean acetabular roof obliquity of the borderline (10.6 ± 4.3 [SD]°) was significantly larger than the control (3.0° ± 5.4°; P < .001) and smaller than the dysplasia (19.3° ± 5.7°; P < .001). Although the mean acetabular anteversion angle of the borderline (21.3° ± 3.7°) was significantly larger than control (17.9 ± 3.5°; P = .001), that of the borderline was not different from the dysplasia (23.3° ± 4.0°; P = .053). The mean anterior ZARC in the borderline (29.8 ± 2.6 mm) was significantly larger than the control (28.0 ± 2.2 mm; P = .011) and smaller than the dysplasia (31.5 ± 2.7 mm; P = .009). The mean superior ZARC in the borderline (25.7 ± 3.0 mm) was not different from the control (25.9 ± 2.2 mm; P = .934) or the dysplasia (25.8 ± 2.5 mm; P = .991). Although the mean posterior ZARC in the borderline (27.2 ± 2.5 mm) was not different from the control (26.4 ± 1.9 mm; P = .455), that of the borderline group was significantly smaller than the dysplasia (30.4 ± 3.3 mm; P < .001); that is, the severity of lateral under-coverage affects the anterior and/or posterior zonal-acetabular curvature.

Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopy for Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: Selection Determines the Outcomes

Although the literature has presented results that favored arthroscopic procedures in treating borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH), it remains controversial whether arthroscopic surgery would be better than periacetabular osteotomy for BDDH. Instead of a debate on the application of arthroscopy, the issue worthy of discussion should be distinguishing suitable BDDH candidates for hip arthroscopy. First, identification of patients with real BDDH is critical for making management choices. Second, it should be distinguished whether the major symptoms result from mechanical lesions or functional hip instability. Third, once hip arthroscopy is suggested for BDDH patients, relative contraindications such as advanced age and osteoarthritis should be taken into consideration, in addition to labral repair and capsular closure or plication intraoperatively. In conclusion, more long-term and high-grade evidence is still demanded to end the debate, but we believe that an individualized management strategy based on an accurate diagnosis and comprehensive assessment will bring optimal outcomes for BDDH patients.

Hip Arthroscopy and Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To provide an up-to-date evidence-based review of hip arthroscopy for patients with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH).

METHODS

Literature describing hip arthroscopy in patients with BDDH was systematically identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. All studies that involved BDDH and not just those reporting their clinical outcomes were included. Methodological Index for Non Randomized Studies criteria and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the quality of studies. The definition of BDDH, operative technique, correlation with labrum and/or cartilage lesions, outcome, and factors associated with poor outcome were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Assessment of the articles yielded 28 studies involving 1502 hips that were included for final analysis. There were no studies with a high risk of bias. BDDH was defined as lateral center-edge angle of 20° to 25° in most studies. Hip arthroscopy for BDDH showed an improvement in the weighted mean postoperative modified Harris Hip Score, from 60.2 to 81.7, a relatively high rate of acquisition of minimal clinically important difference of 79.5% to 87%, and had 1.0% rate of complications. Eleven studies reported on all the patients undergoing a capsular plication. Four studies reported that BDDH was associated with cartilage damage on the femoral head. Age older than 35 or 42 years and ≥20° of femoral anteversion were reported as risk factors for poor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Hip arthroscopy for BDDH with capsular plication provides improvement in patient-reported outcome measures and a relatively high rate of acquisition of minimal clinically important difference with a low rate of complications in the shorter term. BDDH may be associated with cartilage damage on the femoral head. Female sex is a factor related to good outcomes, whereas older age, excessive femoral anteversion, and anterior undercoverage of acetabulum are risk factors related to poorer outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III to IV studies.

Radiographic and clinical characteristics associated with a positive PART (Prone Apprehension Relocation Test): a new provocative exam to elicit hip instability

Hip instability due to mild dysplasia can be a diagnostic challenge. The physical exam is an important adjunct to radiographic evaluation for the clinical diagnosis of hip instability. Herein, we describe a new maneuver to replicate hip instability pain, called the PART (Prone Apprehension Relocation Test). We retrospectively identified patients in our institution’s hip preservation registry who presented for evaluation of hip pain. We divided patients into ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ PART and analyzed associated clinical and radiographic findings. Ninety patients (159 hips) were included, 83 female and 7 male, average age 27.3 ± 9.1 years. Thirty-four hips (21.4%) had a positive PART. There were no significant differences in hip range of motion, lateral center edge angle, or in acetabular depth. There was, however, a significant difference in acetabular version at 3 o’clock between the two test groups (18.5 ± 6.9° in negative, 21.2 ± 4.9° in positive, P = 0.045). There was no association between PART and previously described anterior apprehension testing. Historical methods of diagnosing hip dysplasia may not adequately identify patients with clinical hip instability. We describe a new provocative exam, the PART, which may be helpful in replicating hip instability symptoms in patients with anterior acetabular undercoverage. PART positive patients had significantly more acetabular anteversion at the 3 o’clock position, which is measured on computed tomography and is not visible on standard anteroposterior (AP) pelvis or false profile radiographs. We believe that the PART is a valuable supplement to clinical examination and radiographic measurements to identify patients with symptomatic hip instability.

Patients With Borderline Hip Dysplasia Achieve Clinically Significant Improvement After Arthroscopic Femoroacetabular Impingement Surgery: A Case-Control Study With a Minimum 5-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroscopy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) is becoming a more common practice. However, the literature on achieving meaningful outcomes at midterm follow-up, as well as predictors of these outcomes, is limited.

PURPOSE

To (1) compare the rates of achieving meaningful clinical outcomes between patients with and without BHD and (2) identify the predictors for achieving clinical success among patients with BHD 5 years after undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Data from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery with routine capsular closure for the treatment of FAIS between January 2012 and August 2014 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Patients with BHD (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] 20°-25°) were matched 1:2 by age (±1 year) and body mass index (BMI; ±5 kg/m²) to control patients with normal acetabular coverage (LCEA 25°-40°). Data collected included baseline and 5-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were calculated for each patient-reported outcome measure and compared between the 2 groups. A binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors of achieving the MCID and PASS in the BHD group.

RESULTS

The MCID in the BHD group was defined as 9.6, 14.1, and 9.5 for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale, and modified Harris Hip Score, respectively. Threshold scores for achieving the PASS in both groups were 90.9, 76.6, and 81.9, respectively. A total of 88 patients were identified with having BHD and were matched to 176 controls. No statistical differences were identified for age, BMI, or sex. Both the BHD and the non-BHD groups had statistically significant increases in patient-reported outcome scores over the 5-year period, but the difference in both groups was not statistically significant (P > .05 for all). There was no statistical difference in the frequency of patients in the BHD and non-BHD groups achieving the MCID (86.6% vs 85.2%, respectively; P = .804) or PASS (76.0% vs 73.7%, respectively; P = .675) on at least 1 outcome measure. The logistic regression model demonstrated that being physically active (odds ratio [OR], 27.59; P = .005) and being female (OR, 14.64; P = .025) were independent predictors of achieving the MCID, while running (OR, 11.1; P = .002), being female (OR, 7.6; P = .011), and a larger preoperative LCEA (OR, 2.3; P = .001) were independent preoperative predictors of achieving the PASS.

CONCLUSION

The rates of achieving clinical success 5 years after undergoing arthroscopic treatment with capsular closure for FAIS were not significantly different between patients with BHD and those with normal acetabular coverage. Being physically active, running for exercise, female sex, and a larger LCEA were preoperative predictors of achieving clinical success at 5 years in patients with BHD.

Is Hip Arthroscopy an Adequate Therapy for the Borderline Dysplastic Hip? Correlation Between Radiologic Findings and Clinical Outcomes

Background

Recent studies have shown that assessment of the lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and 25° is not sufficient to adequately classify mildly dysplastic hips and that further radiological features should be considered. However, no correlation between different morphologic features and clinical outcomes has been investigated so far.

Purpose

To analyze the clinical outcomes of patients with different subtypes of borderline dysplastic hips who underwent arthroscopic surgery.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

We examined patients with an LCEA between 18° and 25° who underwent arthroscopic treatment for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between January 2015 and December 2016. A hierarchical cluster analysis was performed to identify hip morphologic subtypes according to radiographic parameters, including the LCEA, femoro-epiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index, anterior and posterior wall indices (AWI and PWI), Tönnis angle, alpha angle, and femoral neck-shaft angle. In addition, the International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12) and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were applied preoperatively and at follow-up, and the results were compared among the different clusters. Previously reported minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) values were used to determine clinically significant improvements.

Results

A total of 40 patients were identified. Of these, 36 patients were available for evaluation at a mean follow-up of 43.8 months. In total, 4 sex-independent clusters with different morphologic patterns of the hip were identified: cluster 1, unstable anterolateral deficiency (FEAR index >2°, AWI <0.35); cluster 2, stable anterolateral deficiency (FEAR index <2°, AWI <0.35); cluster 3, stable lateral deficiency (FEAR index >2°, normal AWI and PWI); and cluster 4, stable posterolateral deficiency (FEAR index <2°, PWI <0.85). At follow-up, clusters 1, 2, and 3 showed significantly improved iHOT-12 (P < .0001) and VAS pain (P < .0001) scores, and cluster 4 showed no significant improvements. The MCID of 15.2 points was achieved by all patients in clusters 2 and 3, by 63% of patients in cluster 1, and by 23% of patients in cluster 4. Clusters 2 and 3 differed significantly from clusters 1 and 4 (P = .02). A postoperative PASS score of 60 was achieved by all patients in cluster 3, by 86% of patients in cluster 2, by 63% of patients in cluster 1, and by 20% of patients in cluster 4. The differences between the groups were statistically significant (P = .01).

Conclusion

Arthroscopic surgery yielded good results in the treatment of stable borderline hip dysplasia with anterolateral and lateral deficiency. In contrast, borderline hip dysplasia with acetabular retroversion showed no improvements after arthroscopic therapy. This study underlines the need for an accurate analysis of all possible radiological signs to adequately classify borderline dysplastic hips.

Three-dimensional curvature mismatch of the acetabular radius to the femoral head radius is increased in borderline dysplastic hips

Whether borderline hip dysplasia is pathologic remains unclear. In order to evaluate the three-dimensional joint congruity, this study sought to answer the question: are borderline dysplastic hip curvature mismatch and eccentricity between the acetabulum and the femoral head different from dysplastic or control hips three-dimensionally? The 113 hips, categorized as: dysplastic (LCEA ≤ 20°), 47 hips; borderline (20° ≤ LCEA < 25°), 32 hips; and control (25° ≤ LCEA < 35°), 34 hips; were evaluated. Three-dimensional (3D) femoral and coxal bone models were reconstructed from CT images. Using a custom-written Visual C++ routine, the femoral head and acetabular radii of curvature, and the femoral head and the acetabular curvature center were calculated. Then the ratio of the acetabular radius to the femoral head radius (3D curvature mismatch ratio), and the distance between the acetabular curvature center and the femoral head center (3D center discrepancy distance) were calculated. These indices were compared statistically among the three groups using Tukey's post hoc test. The mean 3D curvature mismatch ratio in the borderline (1.13 ± 0.05) was smaller than in the dysplasia (1.23 ± 0.08, p < 0.001), and larger than in the control (1.07 ± 0.02, p < 0.001). The mean 3D center discrepancy distance in the borderline (3.2 ± 1.4 mm) was smaller than in the dysplasia (4.8 ± 2.3, p < 0.001) and larger than in the control (1.6 ± 0.7, p < 0.001). These results demonstrated that three-dimensional congruity of the borderline dysplastic hip is impaired, but its incongruity is not as severe as in dysplastic hips. The 3D curvature mismatch ratio and the 3D center discrepancy distance can be valuable signs of joint congruity in patients with borderline dysplasia. However, future studies are necessary to clarify any associations between curvature mismatch and pathogenesis of osteoarthritis in borderline dysplasia.

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

PURPOSE

As indications for hip arthroscopy continue to expand, its efficacy in patients with more complex deformities of the hip, such as those with acetabular dysplasia, remains controversial. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify the predictors of failed hip arthroscopy in dysplastic hips and to propose a standardize prognostic sub-classification of dysplasia.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed in accordance with the (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) PRISMA guidelines. Three databases [EMBASE, PubMed, and Ovid (MEDLINE)] were searched using terms including "hip arthroscopy" and "dysplasia". Studies were screened and data extracted in duplicate. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Due to the non-uniform nature of study data, findings were presented in descriptive summary form.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in this systematic review, comprising 712 dysplastic patients (773 hips) with mean age 34.2 years and 74.1% females. Most studies defined hip dysplasia by a lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) of 20°-25° (borderline) or 15°-20° (moderate). Failure was defined as progression to revision arthroscopy, peri-acetabular osteotomy, or total hip arthroplasty. Overall, failure rate was 192/743 (25.8%) at an average of 28.1 months following index arthroscopy. Smaller LCEA, larger Tönnis angle, broken Shenton line, and decreased joint space (≤ 2 mm) were radiographic predictors of failure. Severe cartilage lesions to the femoral head or acetabulum were associated with failure in five studies. Labral debridement led to more failures than labral repair.

CONCLUSION

Overall, hip arthroscopy yielded good outcomes in mildly dysplastic hips without severe chondral damage. Hip arthroscopy is expected to result in a failed outcome in individuals with moderate-to-severe hip dysplasia (LCEA < 15°), severe cartilage lesions, larger Tönnis angle (> 20°), broken Shenton line, and decreased joint space (≤ 2 mm). Arthroscopic surgery may be more effective in individuals with borderline-to-mild (LCEA 15°-25°) acetabular dysplasia in the absence of severe cartilaginous lesions (7-year survival: 89.6%). A standardized prognostic classification of hip dysplasia based on the LCEA and Tönnis angle is proposed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of non-randomized studies, Level IV.

Surgical Outcomes in the Treatment of Concomitant Mild Acetabular Dysplasia and Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To analyze the current approaches and clinical outcomes in the surgical management of concomitant mild acetabular dysplasia and femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

METHODS

Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) method, the PubMed and Medline databases were searched in March 2019 for studies that reported on surgical outcomes in hips with concomitant mid acetabular dysplasia and FAI. Studies published in English that focused on the surgical outcomes after hip arthroscopy, open surgery, or periacetabular osteotomy of concomitant acetabular dysplasia and FAI, in which the lateral center-edge angle of all subjects was between 15° and 25°, were included. Articles that included subjects with lateral center-edge angle <15°, with a minimum follow-up duration <1 year, had <5 subjects, or were not original articles were excluded.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 748 studies, and 5 studies met the inclusion criteria. All these 5 studies focused on hip arthroscopic treatment for patients with concomitant mild acetabular dysplasia and FAI. Three studies had level III evidence, whereas 2 studies had level IV evidence. The mean patient age range across the studies was 29.8 to 49.6 years, and the female-to-male ratio was 1.14. Improved patient-reported outcomes (Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sport, modified Harris Hip Score, Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) at a minimum 2-year follow-up were obtained in 4 of the 5 studies. Two of these 4 studies had a comparative cohort of patients with FAI with normal acetabular coverage, and there was no significant difference in the postoperative outcomes and secondary procedure rate between patients with mild acetabular dysplasia and those with normal acetabular coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicates that improved patient-reported outcomes can be obtained with hip arthroscopy in the treatment of concomitant mild acetabular dysplasia and FAI at a minimum 2-year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III and Level IV studies.

Evaluation and Treatment of Borderline Dysplasia: Moving Beyond the Lateral Center Edge Angle

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this manuscript is to 1 define the features associated with borderline acetabular dysplasia and 2 review current status of diagnostic algorithms and treatment options for borderline dysplasia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Acetabular dysplasia is a common cause of hip pain secondary to insufficient coverage of the femoral head by the bony acetabulum. Historical classification of acetabular dysplasia has utilized the lateral center edge angle (LCEA); values above 25° are normal and below 20° are considered pathologic. Borderline dysplasia describes hips with LCEA between 20 and 25^o; treatment of these patients is controversial. While many studies utilize LCEA in classification of borderline dysplasia, isolated reliance on measurement of lateral femoral head coverage to define severity of undercoverage will continue to mislabel morphology. Thorough assessment of the characteristics of mild acetabular undercoverage is necessary for future studies, which will allow effective comparisons of results between hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy.

Is the Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof (FEAR) index on MRI a relevant predictive factor of instability in a borderline dysplastic hip?

AIMS

A borderline dysplastic hip can behave as either stable or unstable and this makes surgical decision making challenging. While an unstable hip may be best treated by acetabular reorientation, stable hips can be treated arthroscopically. Several imaging parameters can help to identify the appropriate treatment, including the Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof (FEAR) index, measured on plain radiographs. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and the sensitivity of FEAR index on MRI compared with its radiological measurement.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The technique of measuring the FEAR index on MRI was defined and its reliability validated. A retrospective study assessed three groups of 20 patients: an unstable group of 'borderline dysplastic hips' with lateral centre edge angle (LCEA) less than 25° treated successfully by periacetabular osteotomy; a stable group of 'borderline dysplastic hips' with LCEA less than 25° treated successfully by impingement surgery; and an asymptomatic control group with LCEA between 25° and 35°. The following measurements were performed on both standardized radiographs and on MRI: LCEA, acetabular index, femoral anteversion, and FEAR index.

RESULTS

The FEAR index showed excellent intraobserver and interobserver reliability on both MRI and radiographs. The FEAR index was more reliable on radiographs than on MRI. The FEAR index on MRI was lower in the stable borderline group (mean -4.2° (sd 9.1°)) compared with the unstable borderline group (mean 7.9° (sd 6.8°)). With a FEAR index cut-off value of 2°, 90% of patients were correctly identified as stable or unstable using the radiological FEAR index, compared with 82.5% using the FEAR index on MRI. The FEAR index was a better predictor of instability on plain radiographs than on MRI.

CONCLUSION

The FEAR index measured on MRI is less reliable and less sensitive than the FEAR index measured on radiographs. The cut-off value of 2° for radiological FEAR index predicted hip stability with 90% probability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1578-1584.

Editorial Commentary: Myth Buster-Is Femoral Retroversion a Contraindication to Hip Arthroscopy in Femoroacetabular Impingement?

Hip arthroscopy can effectively address cam and pincer impingement by reshaping bone prominences or bone edges. However, hip arthroscopy cannot be used to correct severe bone torsion abnormalities such as acetabular or femoral retroversion. As a result, some surgeons contraindicate hip arthroscopy in patients with femoral retroversion absent correction of the torsion abnormalities. However, recent research has suggested that hip arthroscopy absent osteotomy, with a focus on labral preservation and thorough correction of underlying cam and pincer bony abnormalities, achieves positive outcomes. Still, although femoral retroversion should not be considered a contraindication for hip arthroscopy, patients should be carefully counseled about residual symptoms.

Patients With Borderline Hip Dysplasia Achieve Clinically Significant Outcome After Arthroscopic Femoroacetabular Impingement Surgery: A Case-Control Study With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

There is a growing trend for hip arthroscopists to treat patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) without addressing the acetabular coverage. However, the literature of outcomes and failure rates for these patients is conflicting.

PURPOSE

(1) To identify whether patients with BHD achieved 2-year similar patient-reported outcome, minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) when compared with patients without BHD and (2) to identify predictors for achieving the MCID and PASS among patients with BHD who are undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Data from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with routine capsular closure for the treatment of FAIS between January 2012 and January 2017 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Patients with BHD (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA], 20°-25°) were matched 2:1 by age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) to control patients with normal acetabular coverage (LCEA, >25°-40°). Patient-reported outcome, MCID, and PASS were compared between the groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified significant predictors of achieving the MCID and PASS in the BHD group.

RESULTS

The MCID in the BHD group was defined as 9.2, 13.7, 8.5, and 15.2 for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific, modified Harris Hip Score, and iHOT-12, respectively. Threshold scores for achieving the PASS in both groups were 87.9, 76.4, 78.1, and 60.0. A total of 112 patients were identified as having BHD (LCEA, 20°-25°) and were matched to 224 controls. Both groups saw statistically significant increases in score averages over the 2-year period; however, the differences between them were not statistically significant (P > .05 for all). There was no statistical difference in the frequency of the BHD and non-BHD cohorts achieving the MCID on at least 1 threshold score (86.6% vs 85.6%, P = .837) and the PASS (78.6% vs 79.8%, P = .79). There was, however, a statistically significant difference between the rates of patients with and without BHD achieving the PASS on the modified Harris Hip Score threshold (62.5% vs 74.5%, P = .028). The final logistic models demonstrated that lower BMI (odds ratio [OR], 0.872; P = .029), lower preoperative alpha angle (OR, 0.965; P = .014), and female sex (OR, 3.647; P = .03) are independent preoperative predictors of achieving the MCID, while lower preoperative alpha angle (OR, 0.943; P = .018) and self-reported limp (OR, 18.53; P = .007) are independent preoperative predictors of achieving the PASS.

CONCLUSION

Outcome improvements in patients with BHD who are undergoing arthroscopic treatment with capsular closure for FAIS are not significantly different from patients with normal acetabular coverage. Lower BMI, lower alpha angle, absence of limp, and female sex are preoperative predictors of achieving meaningful clinically significant outcome improvements in patients with BHD.

Hip Arthroscopic Surgery in Borderline Developmental Dysplastic Hips: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether hip arthroscopic surgery should be applied to patients with a borderline developmental dysplastic hip (BDDH).

PURPOSE

To review the outcomes of hip arthroscopic surgery for a BDDH and which factors influence these outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched through March 2018 for studies reporting the outcomes of primary hip arthroscopic surgery in patients with a BDDH. Inclusion in the review was based on the definition of a BDDH, patient-reported outcomes, and duration of follow-up. The primary outcome was the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS). The failure rate, visual analog scale, satisfaction score, and patient-reported outcomes such as the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score were defined as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Nine studies with 425 patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery were included in this review. The mean follow-up times ranged from 25.4 to 28.8 months across the studies. A significant improvement was obtained in the mHHS, with a mean score of 61.8 preoperatively to 82.8 postoperatively; all other patient-reported outcomes also improved significantly, except the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey mental component summary. The overall failure rate was 14.1%, and the mean reoperation rate was 8.5%. The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty ranged from 4.4% to 26.0%, and the rate of conversion to periacetabular osteotomy was 4.0%. Combined defects such as cartilage damage, hip osteoarthritis, ligamentum teres tears, and femoroacetabular impingement could influence the outcomes after arthroscopic surgery in BDDHs.

CONCLUSION

Hip arthroscopic surgery was demonstrated to be a promising approach for BDDHs, but the outcomes could be influenced by multiple risk factors. A higher level of evidence is still needed to support current findings.

Outcomes for Surgical Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adults

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess the outcomes of modern techniques for arthroscopic surgery in the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.

RECENT FINDINGS

While initially approached by means of open surgical hip dislocation, recent literature has shown generally good outcomes of arthroscopic treatment for femoroacetabular impingement. Modern advances in hip arthroscopy technique and implants now allow for labral repair or reconstruction when indicated. Arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement results in significant improvements in patient pain and function, with low complication rates and high patient satisfaction. A majority of improvements in these patients occur within 1 to 2 years post-operatively. Hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement yields the best results in patients without significant arthritis or hip dysplasia.

Correction of mildly dysplastic hips with periacetabular osteotomy demonstrates promising outcomes, achievement of correction goals, and excellent five-year survivorship

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), radiological measurements, and total hip arthroplasty (THA)-free survival in patients who underwent periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for mild, moderate, or severe developmental dysplasia of the hip.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study involving 336 patients (420 hips) who underwent PAO by a single surgeon at an academic centre. After exclusions, 124 patients (149 hips) were included. The preoperative lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) was used to classify the severity of dysplasia: 18° to 25° was considered mild (n = 20), 10° to 17° moderate (n = 66), and < 10° severe (n = 63). There was no difference in patient characteristics between the groups (all, p > 0.05). Pre- and postoperative radiological measurements were made. The National Institute of Health's Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) outcome measures (physical function computerized adaptive test (PF CAT), Global Physical and Mental Health Scores) were collected. Failure was defined as conversion to THA or PF CAT scores < 40, and was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis. The mean follow-up was five years (2 to 10) ending in either failure or the latest contact with the patient.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in PROMs for moderate (p = 0.167) or severe (p = 0.708) groups compared with the mild dysplasia group. The numerical pain scores were between 2 and 3 units in all groups at the final follow-up (all, p > 0.05). There was no significant difference (all, p > 0.05) in the proportion of patients achieving target correction for the LCEA between groups. The mean correction was 12° in the mild, 15° in the moderate (p = 0.135), and 23° in the severe group (p < 0.001). Failure-free survival at five years was 100% for mild, 79% for moderate, and 92% for severely dysplastic hips (p = 0.225).

CONCLUSION

Although requiring less correction than hips with moderate or severe dysplasia, we found PAO for mild dysplasia to be associated with promising PROMs, consistent with that of the general United States population, and excellent survivorship at five years. Future studies should compare these results with the outcome after arthroscopy of the hip in patients with mild dysplasia. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):16-22.

Hip Arthroscopy of a Painful Hip with Borderline Dysplasia

Purpose

Hip arthroscopy has been considered for treating hip dysplasia; however, its efficacy is still a matter of controversy. Here, we report outcomes of patients with borderline dysplasia treated with a contemporary hip arthroscopy technique.

Materials and Methods

Forty-seven hips with borderline hip dysplasia were treated using hip arthroscopy. Patients underwent procedures to correct torn labrums or ligamentum teres with additional procedure on the acetabular capsule. Patient outcomes were assessed using visual analogue scale (VAS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS) and patient satisfaction. Risk factors for poor prognosis were also investigated.

Results

The mean follow up period was 25.9 months. At the last follow up, mean VAS score decreased from 6.1±1.6 to 3.5±2.8 (P=0.016). The mHHS and NHAS at the last follow up improved from 61.0±7.6 to 78.6±19.5 (P=0.001) and 62.1±7.5 to 80.0±18.5 (P=0.002), respectively. While significant improvement was observed in all patient reported outcome measures tested, 19 (40.4%) hips indicated that “the operation was unsatisfactory.” The only factor shown to influence outcomes was preoperative VAS (i.e., worse scores potentially an indicator of poor outcomes).

Conclusion

The results of the current study indicate that arthroscopic management may be beneficial for a subset of patients with borderline dysplasia; however, the dissatisfaction rate associated with this treatment approach may be as high as 40%. The poor preoperative pain score appears to be the sole indicator for poor outcomes.

Editorial Commentary: Low-Dose Hip Computed Tomography Sharpens the Saw for Hip Preservation: Can It Cut the Tree?

Computed tomography scans provide excellent visualization of complex hip deformities and assist in the diagnosis and surgical planning of hip preservation surgery. The dose of harmful ionizing radiation can be reduced while preserving reasonable image quality. Low-dose hip computed tomography can be used successfully for preoperative planning. Readers should consider strategies to reduce the radiation dose from computed tomography scans and consider magnetic resonance imaging arthrograms for assessment of cartilage and labral status before hip preservation surgery.

Hip Dysplasia Compromises the Outcome of Femoroacetabular Impingement Surgery

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment for patients with symptomatic hip dysplasia presenting with labral tear is unknown. Although femoroacetabular osteoplasty (FAO) has excellent outcome for most femoroacetabular impingement patients, the presence of concomitant hip dysplasia has been implicated as an adverse prognostic factor. This study evaluated the outcome of FAO in a group of dysplastic hips and compared the outcome to a cohort of patients without dysplasia.

METHODS

Seventy-three patients (38 males, 35 females) with hip dysplasia who underwent FAO between 2007 and 2015 were identified. The minimum 2-year clinical, functional (modified Harris Hip Score and Short-Form 36 Health Survey), and radiological outcome was compared with 550 patients without dysplasia who underwent FAO by the same surgeon. The preoperative and postoperative alpha angle, Tonnis grade, joint space, and presence of chondral lesion were determined and compared. Conversion to total hip arthroplasty or revision FAO was considered as treatment failure.

RESULTS

The mean age in the dysplasia cohort was 30.7 ± 11.8 years compared to 34.5 ± 11.2 in the nondysplastic group. The mean follow-up was 4.3 years for dysplasia cohort and 4.1 for the nondysplastic group. The mean modified Harris Hip Score and Short-Form 36 Health Survey6 was significantly lower in the dysplastic group at 75.1 and 74.3 compared to 83.4 and 85.6 for the comparison group. There was a higher percentage of failure at 28.8% among dysplasia patients compared to 2.5% in the nondysplastic group.

CONCLUSION

Although labral repair and FAO may be an option for patients with hip dysplasia, the outcome in this population appears to be less optimal compared to femoroacetabular impingement patients with no evidence of dysplasia. Labral repair and osteoplasty should be limited to those with mild and borderline dysplasia.

Periacetabular Osteotomy Improves Pain and Function in Patients With Lateral Center-edge Angle Between 18° and 25°, but Are These Hips Really Borderline Dysplastic?

BACKGROUND

The treatment of mild or borderline acetabular dysplasia is controversial with surgical options including both arthroscopic labral repair with capsular closure or plication and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). The degree to which improvements in pain and function might be achieved using these approaches may be a function of acetabular morphology and the severity of the dysplasia, but detailed radiographic assessments of acetabular morphology in patients with a lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) of 18° to 25° who have undergone PAO have not, to our knowledge, been performed.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Do patients with an LCEA of 18° to 25° undergoing PAO have other radiographic features of dysplasia suggestive of abnormal femoral head coverage by the acetabulum? (2) What is the survivorship free from revision surgery, THA, or severe pain (modified Harris hip score [mHHS] < 70) and proportion of complications as defined by the modified Dindo-Clavien severity scale at minimum 2-year followup? (3) What are the functional patient-reported outcome measures in this cohort at minimum 2 years after surgery as assessed by the UCLA Activity Score, the mHHS, the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and the SF-12 mental and physical domain scores?

METHODS

Between January 2010 and December 2014, a total of 91 patients with hip pain and LCEA of 18° to 25° underwent a hip preservation surgical procedure at our institution. Thirty-six (40%) of the 91 patients underwent hip arthroscopy, and 56 hips (60%) were treated by PAO. In general, patients were considered for hip arthroscopy when symptoms were predominantly associated with femoroacetabular impingement (that is, pain aggravated by sitting and hip flexion activities) and physical examination showed a positive anterior impingement test with negative signs of instability (negative anterior apprehension test). In general, patients were considered for PAO when symptoms suggested instability (that is, pain with upright activities, abductor fatigue now aggravated by sitting) and clinical examinations demonstrated a positive anterior apprehension test. Bilateral surgery was performed in six patients and only the first hip was included in the study. One patient was excluded because PAO was performed to address dysplasia caused by surgical excision of a proximal femoral tumor associated with multiple epiphyseal dysplasia during childhood yielding a total of 49 patients (49 hips). There were 46 of 49 females (94%), the mean age was 26.5 years (± 8), and the mean body mass index was 24 kg/m (± 4.5). Radiographic analysis of preoperative films included the LCEA, Tönnis acetabular roof angle, the anterior center-edge angle, the anterior and posterior wall indices, and the Femoral Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof index. Thirty-nine of the 49 patients (80%) were followed for a minimum 2-year followup (mean, 2.2 years; range, 2-4 years) and were included in the analysis of survivorship after PAO, complications, and functional outcomes. Kaplan-Meier modeling was used to calculate survivorship defined as free from revision surgery, THA, or severe pain (mHHS < 70) at minimum 2 years after surgery. Complications were graded according to the modified Dindo-Clavien severity. Patient-reported outcomes were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2 years after surgery and included the UCLA Activity Score, the mHHS, the HOOS, and the SF-12 mental and physical domain scores.

RESULTS

Forty-six of 49 hips (94%) had at least one other radiographic feature of dysplasia suggestive of abnormal femoral head coverage by the acetabulum. Seventy-three percent of the hips (36 of 49) had two or more radiographic features of hip dysplasia aside from a LCEA of 18° to 25°. The survivorship of PAO at minimum 2 years for the 39 of 49 (80%) patients available was 94% (95% confidence interval, 80%-90%). Three of 39 patients (8%) developed a complication. At a mean of 2.2 years of followup, there was improvement in level of activity (preoperative UCLA score 7 ± 2 versus postoperative UCLA score 6 ± 2; p = 0.02). Hip symptoms and function improved postoperatively, as reflected by a higher mean mHHS (86 ± 13 versus 64 ± 19; p < 0.001) and mean HOOS (386 ± 128 versus 261 ± 117; p < 0.001). Quality of life and overall health assessed by the physical domain of the SF-12 improved (47 ± 11 versus 39 ± 12; p < 0.001). However, with the numbers available, no improvement was observed for the mental domain of the SF-12 (52 ± 8 versus 51 ± 11; p = 0.881).

CONCLUSIONS

Hips with LCEA of 18° to 25° frequently have other radiographic features of dysplasia suggestive of abnormal femoral head coverage by the acetabulum. These hips may be inappropriately labeled as "borderline" or "mild" dysplasia on consideration of LCEA alone. A more comprehensive imaging analysis in these hips by the radiographic features of dysplasia included in this study is recommended to identify hips with abnormal coverage of the femoral head by the acetabulum and to plan treatment accordingly. Patients with LCEA of 18° to 25° showed improvement in hip pain and function after PAO with minimal complications and low proportions of persistent pain or reoperations at short-term followup. Future studies are recommended to investigate whether the benefits of symptomatic and functional improvement are sustained long term.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Diagnosis and treatment of labral tear

Objective:

To review the literature regarding diagnosis and treatment of labral tear.

Data sources:

A systematic search was performed in PubMed using various search terms and their combinations including hip, labrum, acetabular labral tear, arthroscopy, diagnosis, and anatomy.

Study selection:

For each included study, information regarding anatomy, function, etiology, diagnosis, and management of acetabular labral tear was extracted.

Results:

Five hundred and sixty abstracts about anatomy, function, etiology, diagnosis, and management of acetabular labral tear were reviewed and 66 selected for full-text review. The mechanism of labral tear has been well explained while the long-term outcomes of various treatment remains unknown.

Conclusions:

Labral tear is generally secondary to femoroacetabular impingement, trauma, dysplasia, capsular laxity, and degeneration. Patients with labral tear complain about anterior hip or groin pain most commonly with a most consistent physical examination called positive anterior hip impingement test. Magnetic resonance arthrography is a reliable radiographic examination with arthroscopy being the gold standard. Conservative treatment consists of rest, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication, pain medications, modification of activities, physical therapy, and intra-articular injection. When fail to respond to conservative treatment, surgical treatment including labral debridement, labral repair, and labral reconstruction is often indicated.

Primary Hip Arthroscopic Surgery With Labral Reconstruction: Is There a Difference Between an Autograft and Allograft?

Background:

Labral reconstruction has been described as a solution for the irreparable labrum. Initial techniques employed autografts, while more recent procedures have utilized allografts. No study, to our knowledge, has compared graft types.

Purpose:

To compare outcomes between patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction with a hamstring allograft versus hamstring autograft.

Hypothesis:

No significant differences in outcomes will be found between patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction with an allograft versus autograft.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Data from September 2010 to March 2015 were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were primary hip arthroscopic surgery with labral reconstruction using either a hamstring allograft (ALLO group) or autograft (AUTO group), with minimum 2-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score–Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip surgery, previous hip conditions, preoperative Tönnis osteoarthritis grade >1, and workers’ compensation claims. Significance was set at P = .05.

Results:

Twenty-nine patients (29 hips) were included (85.3% follow-up). There were 17 patients (17 hips) in the ALLO group and 12 patients (12 hips) in the AUTO group. All patient-reported outcome scores demonstrated significant improvements at latest follow-up except for the mHHS for the AUTO group (P = .064). Comparisons between the ALLO and AUTO groups at the preoperative and latest follow-up time points showed no significant differences (preoperative mean [range]: mHHS, 67.5 [33.0-100.0] and 65.8 [29.0-96.0], respectively [P = .826]; NAHS, 65.6 [26.3-92.5] and 58.5 [35.0-79.0], respectively [P = .322]; HOS-SSS, 43.7 [12.5-100.0] and 40.1 [19.0-78.0], respectively [P = .707]) (latest follow-up mean [range]: mHHS, 86.4 [56.0-100.0] and 81.4 [57.0-100.0], respectively [P = .46]; NAHS, 87.7 [60.0-100.0] and 82.4 [56.3-100.0], respectively [P = .396]; HOS-SSS, 81.7 [0.0-100.0] and 70.9 [27.8-100.0], respectively [P = .423]).

Conclusion:

Primary arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction yielded improvements in patient-reported outcome scores and high patient satisfaction. In this small series, no differences were found in clinical outcomes between hamstring allografts and autografts. Based on these results, hamstring allografts and autografts may be considered comparable graft choices for primary reconstruction. Because of the avoidance of donor site morbidity and the possible increase in patient satisfaction, allografts may be the preferred choice in a surgical setting when they are accessible.

Hip labral reconstruction: consensus study on indications, graft type and technique among high-volume surgeons

To survey high-volume hip arthroscopists regarding their current indications for labral reconstruction, graft preference and technique. In May 2018, a cross-sectional based survey was conducted on high-volume hip arthroscopists. A high-volume surgeon was defined as an orthopaedist who had case experience ranging from 50 to 5000 hip arthroscopies performed annually. The survey included their current indications for labral reconstruction, graft preference and technique. Twelve high-volume surgeons successfully completed the questionnaire. The mean arthroscopic procedures performed by the surgeons annually was 188.7 (range 60–350). Four surgeons (33.3%) performed <5 labral reconstruction cases per year, three (25.0%) 5–10 cases per year, two (16.7%) 11–15 cases per year and three (25.0%) over 20 cases per year. Of the 12 surgeons, 11 (91.6%) would reconstruct in certain primary settings and 100% would reconstruct in revision settings. In the primary setting, the main indications for reconstruction were poor quality labral tissue, calcified labrum and hypoplastic labrum. None of the surgeons recommended labral reconstruction for reparable labral tears in primary cases. In primary cases of irreparable labra, 58.3% of the surgeons favoured reconstruction over debridement. In revisions, 100% of the surgeon favoured reconstruction over debridement; 91.7% chose an allograft option versus an autograft alternative. Amongst high-volume arthroscopists, labral reconstruction was considered a valuable technique to restore labral function. Labral reconstruction was more often advocated in revision than in primary settings. Allograft was the preferred choice for reconstruction. Excision of the labral tissue prior to reconstruction was favoured over augmentation. Fewer surgeons performed circumferential reconstruction than segmental reconstruction.

Editorial Commentary: Hip Arthroscopy-The Tissue-Friendly Evolution

The field of hip arthroscopy is saturated with low-level studies. A systematic review of these low-level studies provides low-level evidence favoring tissue-friendly restorative techniques such as labral repair and capsular repair over nonrestorative techniques such as labral debridement and capsulotomy. Iatrogenic complications such as nerve injuries and heterotopic ossification remain the most common complications of hip arthroscopy. This indicates that there is a further scope in improving the safety of hip arthroscopy. There is a need for innovative, well-designed benchtop and high-level clinical studies for rapid advancement in hip arthroscopy techniques.

Mild or Borderline Hip Dysplasia: Are We Characterizing Hips With a Lateral Center-Edge Angle Between 18° and 25° Appropriately?

BACKGROUND

Controversy surrounds the classification and treatment of hips with a lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and 25°. It remains undetermined as to whether periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) or arthroscopic surgery is best used to treat this patient population.

HYPOTHESIS

Patients with hip pain and mild or borderline acetabular dysplasia defined by an LCEA between 18° and 25° have different features of acetabular and femoral morphology, as determined by other relevant radiographic measures assessing the anterior and posterior acetabular walls, anterior coverage of the femoral head by the acetabulum, and femoral head and neck junction sphericity.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who had an LCEA between 18° and 25° undergoing hip preservation between January 2010 and December 2015 with either PAO or hip arthroscopic surgery was performed. Anteroposterior, Dunn lateral, and false profile radiographs were used to measure the LCEA, Tönnis angle, anterior center-edge angle (ACEA), anterior wall index (AWI) and posterior wall index (PWI), femoral epiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index and posterior to anterior wall index, and alpha angle and femoral neck-shaft angle. An agglomerative hierarchical clustering analysis was then performed on the continuous radiographic variables to identify different subtypes of hip pathomorphology among the study cohort. There were sex-specific trends in hip morphology. Therefore, we proceeded to perform separate cluster analyses for each sex. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify radiographic parameters for distinguishing between female patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery versus PAO.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients with hip pain and an LCEA between 18° and 25° underwent surgery in the study period, 77 (78%) were female, and 81 (82%) had complete radiographs for cluster analyses. The mean age was 22.6 years. Hip arthroscopic surgery was performed in 40 (41%) patients, and PAO was performed in 58 (59%) patients. The ACEA (45%), FEAR index (34%), and AWI (30%) were the most commonly abnormal radiographic parameters among all patients. In female patients, the ACEA (55%), FEAR index (42%), and AWI (34%) were the most commonly abnormal radiographic parameters. In male patients, the PWI (48%) was the most common radiographic abnormality. For female patients, 3 clusters representing different patterns of hip morphology were identified: acetabular deficiency with cam morphology, lateral acetabular deficiency, and anterolateral acetabular deficiency. For male patients, 3 clusters were also identified: posterolateral acetabular deficiency with global cam morphology, posterolateral acetabular deficiency with focal cam morphology, and lateral acetabular deficiency without cam morphology. The ACEA (odds ratio [OR], 47.7 [95% CI, 9.6-237.6]; P < .001) and AWI (OR, 3.9 [95% CI, 1.0-15.0]; P = .049) were identified as independent factors predicting which procedure was performed in female patients.

CONCLUSION

A comprehensive evaluation of radiographic parameters in patients with an LCEA between 18° and 25° identified sex-specific trends in hip morphology and showed a large proportion of dysplastic features among these patients. An isolated assessment of the LCEA is an oversimplistic approach that may jeopardize appropriate classification and may provide insufficient data to guide the treatment of hips with additional features of dysplasia and instability.

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

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.

Outcomes of Surgical Management of Borderline Hip Dysplasia: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Multiple reports have detailed clinical outcomes in surgically treated patients with borderline hip dysplasia. The purpose of this systematic review was to define patient outcomes following these surgical interventions.

METHODS

Searches were developed using an iterative process of gathering and evaluating terms. Comprehensive strategies including both index and keyword methods were devised for the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Independent review and data abstraction was performed by two authors. Inclusion criteria were clear delineation of outcomes for patients with borderline hip dysplasia (Lateral center edge angle (LCEA) 18-25°) and outcomes following hip arthroscopy and/ or periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), including patient reported outcomes (PROs), revision arthroscopy, and conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty. Exclusion criteria included alternative surgical procedures including "shelf" or "salvage" osteotomies, studies without patient outcomes or clearly delineated results for patients with borderline dysplasia, inclusion of <5 borderline patients, or inadequate follow-up defined as < 12 months.

RESULTS

Thirteen of 2109 articles met inclusion criteria for full data analysis. 505 patients (mean age 29.6 years, 67.7% female) with borderline dysplasia (mean LCEA 22.3°) were treated with hip arthroscopy. The majority of studies reported outcomes using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Hip Outcome Score Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS); all showed post-operative improvement with mean increase of 21.0 and 26.8 points, respectively. Revision arthroscopy rate was 7.5% (31/412), and a total hip arthroplasty conversion rate was 4.0% (18/455). The average combined total reoperation rate was 13.7% (69/505).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic management of borderline hip dysplasia is associated with meaningful improvement in PRO scores. However, there appears to be a high reoperation rate including both arthroscopic and open revision procedures. There is a paucity of studies reporting outcomes of PAO in patients with borderline hip dysplasia.Level of evidence: Systematic review of Level III and Level IV studies.

Arthroscopic Capsular Plication in Patients With Labral Tears and Borderline Dysplasia of the Hip: Analysis of Risk Factors for Failure

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroscopy for the treatment of instability in the setting of borderline dysplasia is controversial. Capsular management in such cases is an important consideration, and plication has been described as a reliable technique, with good midterm outcomes reported when indications are appropriate.

HYPOTHESIS

Patients with borderline dysplasia who have a lower lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) and greater age will be at a higher risk of failure after arthroscopic capsular plication.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively reviewed for all patients between 15 and 40 years of age who underwent hip arthroscopy from November 2008 to January 2015. Inclusion criteria were an LCEA between 18° and 25°, Tönnis grade ≤1, primary case with capsular plication, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were excluded if they had any history of ipsilateral hip procedure or conditions such as Legg-Calve-Perthes disease, slipped capital femoral epiphysis, rheumatologic disease, and Tönnis grade ≥2. Age, sex, and body mass index data were retrieved for each patient. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs)-including modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale, and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain (0-10)-were obtained preoperatively and at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively, in addition to the postoperative International Hip Outcome Tool-12. The "success" group consisted of all patients who achieved the patient acceptable symptomatic state of mHHS ≥74 and had no ipsilateral hip surgery subsequent to their index arthroscopy. The "failure" group was composed of patients who were below the patient acceptable symptomatic state at latest follow-up or required secondary arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Patient satisfaction and minimal clinically important difference were also calculated. Mean age for the failure group was applied as a cutoff age for subanalysis, and relative risk for failure was determined.

RESULTS

Ninety patients (97 hips; 79.5%) met criteria for the success group, and 25 patients (25 hips) met criteria for the failure group. No significant differences in preoperative baseline scores or VAS were found. However, there did appear to be a trend that the failure group had lower mean preoperative scores for all PRO measures and a higher VAS score. The differences in preoperative mHHS and NAHS closely approached significance ( P = .053). Postoperative PRO, VAS, and patient satisfaction scores of the success group were significantly higher than the failure group. The failure group was significantly older than the success group (28.5 ± 7.8 vs 23.5 ± 7.5 years, P = .005). Patients >35 years old were 2.25 times more likely to fail according to relative risk (95% CI, 1.10-4.60; P = .0266). LCEA did not differ between the groups, and no other risk factors for failure were identified.

CONCLUSION

Stringent criteria for patient selection and meticulous repair or augmentation of the static stabilizers of the hip yielded favorable clinical outcomes in this study cohort with borderline dysplasia. Within this carefully selected group, the analysis revealed that increased age was the main risk factor for failure in the management of borderline hip dysplasia via isolated primary arthroscopic hip surgery with capsular plication.

Surgical Decision Making for Acetabular Labral Tears: An International Perspective

Background:

Studies comparing acetabular labral repair with debridement have generally demonstrated better clinical outcomes with repair. However, it is not clear whether hip arthroscopic surgeons agree on the indications for labral repair and debridement, bringing the generalizability of these (and future) studies into question.

Purpose:

To investigate surgical decision making for acetabular labral tears, with a specific focus on indications for repair or debridement, by performing an international survey of hip arthroscopic surgeons.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study.

Methods:

A total of 35 hip arthroscopic surgeons from around the world were invited to participate in this survey study. Surgeons selected the factors that they consider when deciding to repair or debride acetabular labral tears. For each variable selected, computerized adaptive logic prompted additional questions to better define how that variable affects decision making. Six deidentified intraoperative videos of a variety of labral tears were included to determine the level of agreement between the experts on which labral tears are repairable.

Results:

The survey response rate was 86%. A majority (77%) of hip arthroscopic surgeons selected the intraoperative appearance of the labrum as the most important factor affecting their decision making. Specific factors affecting surgical decision making included pattern of the labral tear (73% of surgeons), ossification of the labrum (70%), magnetic resonance imaging findings (70%), patient age (63%), activity level (57%), radiographic findings (53%), calcification of the labrum (50%), and thickness of the labrum (47%). Three intraoperative videos had ≥90% agreement for labral repair, while the other 3 had ≤76% agreement.

Conclusion:

The intraoperative appearance of the labrum is the most important factor affecting surgical decision making. However, different surgeons viewing the same tear arthroscopically may select different treatments. The indications to repair a torn acetabular labrum are highly variable among hip arthroscopic surgeons.

Progressive osteoarthritis during pregnancy several years following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement

Case

A 28-year-old with borderline left hip dysplasia who underwent arthroscopic acetabuloplasty, femoral osteochondroplasty, and labral repair for femoroacetabular impingement. She did well for 8 years, though required arthroscopic capsulolabral adhesion release 2 years after the initial procedure. After this period of stability, she developed left hip pain during pregnancy. Radiographs demonstrated progressive osteoarthritis that lead to total hip arthroplasty at age 37.

Conclusion

The physiologic and hormonal changes during pregnancy leading to increased ligamentous laxity may put vulnerable patients with hip dysplasia and iatrogenic instability at increased risk for progression of osteoarthritis.

Hip Arthroscopic Surgery With Labral Preservation and Capsular Plication in Patients With Borderline Hip Dysplasia: Minimum 5-Year Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The arthroscopic management of hip dysplasia has been controversial and has historically demonstrated mixed results. Studies on patients with borderline dysplasia, emphasizing the importance of the labrum and capsule as secondary stabilizers, have shown improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to assess whether the results of hip arthroscopic surgery with labral preservation and concurrent capsular plication in patients with borderline hip dysplasia have lasting, positive outcomes at a minimum 5-year follow-up. It was hypothesized that with careful patient selection, outcomes would be favorable.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for patients aged <40 years who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for intra-articular abnormalities. Inclusion criteria included lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and 25°, concurrent capsular plication and labral preservation, and minimum 5-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria were severe dysplasia (LCEA ≤18°), Tönnis grade ≥2, pre-existing childhood hip conditions, or prior hip surgery. PRO scores including the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Hip Outcome Score Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS) and the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain were collected preoperatively, at 3 months, and annually thereafter. Complications and revisions were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-five hips (24 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one hips (19 patients, 84%) were available for follow-up. The mean age at surgery was 22.9 years. The mean preoperative LCEA and Tönnis angle were 21.7° (range, 18° to 24°) and 6.9° (range, -1° to 16°), respectively. The mean follow-up was 68.8 months. The mean mHHS increased from 70.3 to 85.9 ( P < .0001), the mean NAHS from 68.3 to 87.3 ( P < .0001), and the mean HOS-SSS from 52.1 to 70.8 ( P = .0002). The mean VAS score improved from 5.6 to 1.8 ( P < .0001). Four hips (19%) required secondary arthroscopic procedures, all of which resulted in improved PRO scores at latest follow-up. No patient required conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

While periacetabular osteotomy remains the standard for treating true acetabular dysplasia, hip arthroscopy may provide a safe and durable means of managing intra-articular abnormalities in the setting of borderline acetabular dysplasia at midterm follow-up. These procedures should be performed by surgeons with expertise in advanced arthroscopic techniques, using strict patient selection criteria, with emphasis on labral preservation and capsular plication.

Endoscopic shelf acetabuloplasty can improve clinical outcomes and achieve return to sports-related activity in active patients with hip dysplasia

PURPOSE

To investigate clinical outcomes and return to sports-related activity following endoscopic shelf acetabuloplasty combined with labral repair in the treatment of the active patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2013, 32 patients (36 hips; 11 males and 21 females; 11 right 17 left 4 bilateral; median age 28.5, range 12-51 years), who underwent endoscopic shelf acetabuloplasty combined with labral repair and met the inclusion criteria were enrolled in this study. There was a minimum follow-up of 2 years (average 32.3 ± 3 months, range 24-48 months). Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores including the modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS) and Non-Arthritis Hip Score (NAHS) were obtained preoperatively and at final follow-up for the assessment of surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean MHHS significantly improved from 68.4 ± 14.3 (range 23.1-95.7) preoperatively to 94.5 ± 8.5 (range 66-100) at final follow-up (p = 0.001). Similarly, the NAHS also significantly improved from 51.3 ± 11.9 (range 23-76) preoperatively to 73.0 ± 7.4 (range 44-80) at final follow-up (p = 0.001). The mean LCE angle significantly increased postoperatively but partially decreased at final follow-up (mean preoperative versus postoperative versus final follow-up: 16.0 range 5-24, versus 40.1 range 27-58, versus 30.1 range 20-41. p = 0.001, respectively). There were 3 patients who returned to a higher activity level, 20 patients who returned to the same activity level, and 6 patients who returned to a lower activity level. The mean period from surgery to return to play was 9.0 ± 3.5 months (range 5-18).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic shelf acetabuloplasty provides promising clinical outcomes and return to sports-related activity for active patients with DDH.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

A Traffic Light Grading System of Hip Dysplasia to Predict the Success of Arthroscopic Hip Surgery

BACKGROUND

The role of hip arthroscopic surgery in dysplasia is controversial.

PURPOSE

To determine the 7-year joint preservation rate after hip arthroscopic surgery in hip dysplasia and identify anatomic and intraoperative features that predict the success of hip preservation with arthroscopic surgery, allowing the formulation of an evidence-based classification system.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2013, 111 hips with dysplastic features (acetabular index [AI] >10° and/or lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] <25°) that underwent arthroscopic surgery were identified. Clinical, radiological, and operative findings and the type of procedure performed were reviewed. Radiographic evaluations of the operated hip (AI, LCEA, extrusion index) were performed. Outcome measures included whether the hip was preserved (ie, did not require arthroplasty) at follow-up and the preoperative and postoperative Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS) and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). The AI and LCEA were calculated, factored by a measure of articular wear (AI_f and LCEA_f, respectively), according to the University College Hospital, London (UCL) grading system as follows: AI_f = AI × (number of UCL wear zones + 1), and LCEA_f = LCEA / (number of UCL wear zones + 1). A contour plot of the resulting probability value of failure for every combination of AI_f and LCEA_f allowed for the determination of the zones with the lowest and highest incidences of failure to preserve the hip.

RESULTS

The mean AI and LCEA were 9.8° and 18.0°, respectively. At a mean follow-up of 4.5 years (range, 0.4-8.3 years), 33 hips had failed, requiring hip arthroplasty. The 7-year joint survival rate was 68%. The mean improvements in the NAHS and HOOS were 11 ( P = .001) and 22.8 ( P < .001) points, respectively. The zone with the greatest chance of joint preservation (odds ratio, 10; P < .001) was the green zone, with an AI_f of 0° to 15° and an LCEA_f of 15° to 25°; in contrast, the zone with the greatest chance of failure (odds ratio, 10; P < .001) was the red zone, with an AI_f of 20° to 100° and an LCEA_f of 0° to 10°.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the 7-year hip survival rate in hip dysplasia appears inferior compared with that reported in femoroacetabular impingement (78%). Hip arthroscopic surgery is associated with an excellent chance of hip preservation in mild dysplasia (green zone: AI = 0°-15°, LCEA = 15°-25°) and no articular wear. The authors advise that the greatest caution should be used when considering arthroscopic options in cases of severe dysplasia (red zone: AI >20° and/or LCEA <10°).

Does Hip Arthroscopy Have a Role in the Treatment of Developmental Hip Dysplasia?

BACKGROUND

Indications for hip arthroscopy in mildly dysplastic patients with a symptomatic hip remain controversial.

METHODS

This article provides a concise review of the available literature evaluating the role of hip arthroscopy in treating symptomatic dysplasia. Potential indications for hip arthroscopy in isolation are reviewed. Emerging evidence on the role of hip arthroscopy based on patient-specific pathomorphology is highlighted.

RESULTS

Hip arthroscopy in isolation may be helpful for select dysplastic patients with dynamic impingement or microinstability. Isolated arthroscopic treatment of intra-articular pathology resulting from static overload is unlikely to be successful in the long term and may be detrimental.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic procedures for individuals with mild dysplasia in the absence of frank instability may be effective; however, great caution should be exercised when approaching dysplastic patients with symptomatic hips.