Surgical Treatment of Labral Tears: Debridement, Repair, Reconstruction

Outcomes following open acetabular labrum reconstruction: Comparing fresh-frozen tendon with fresh meniscus allograft transplantation

Background

Symptomatic acetabular labral insufficiency in young, active patients is often treated with labral repair or reconstruction using fresh-frozen allografts. However, fresh-frozen tendon allografts do not have tissue or material properties that closely mimic acetabular labral fibrocartilage. Recent studies suggest meniscal allografts may be a better biomechanical, geometric, and material alternative for acetabular labrum reconstruction (ALR).

Hypothesis

Patients undergoing open ALR using fresh meniscus allograft transplants (MAT) will have better outcomes than those using fresh-frozen tendon allografts transplants (TAT) when comparing initial treatment success, diagnostic imaging assessments, and patient-reported pain and function scores.

Study design

Cohort Study.

Methods

With IRB approval, patients undergoing ALR with either TAT or MAT were included when initial (>1-year) outcomes data related to treatment success, pain, and function were available. In addition, a subcohort of patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging at least 6-months after surgery to evaluate allograft healing.

Results

Initial success rate, defined as no need for ALR revision or conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), was 88.9% for the entire group (n = 27, TAT = 5, MAT = 22) with 1 (20%) patient in the TAT cohort and 2 patients (9.9%) in the MAT cohort undergoing THA. In the MAT cohort, significant improvements were documented for physical function and pain scores at 1 year and final follow-up (FFU)(mean 26.8 months). Improvements in pain and function were noted at 1-year, but not at FFU (mean 59.6 months) in the TAT group. MRIs completed at least 6 months after labrum reconstruction showed improved allograft integrity and integration in the MAT cohort over the TAT cohort.

Conclusion

For acetabular labrum reconstructions, MAT was associated with a higher initial success rate, superior patient reported outcomes, and subjectively better MRI findings when compared to TAT.

Patients Undergoing Revision Hip Arthroscopy With Labral Reconstruction or Augmentation Demonstrate Favorable Patient Reported Outcomes: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To review current literature evaluating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship in patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy with labral reconstruction or augmentation.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed with the following key words: (revision) AND (hip OR femoroacetabular impingement) AND (arthroscopy OR arthroscopic) AND (reconstruction OR augmentation OR irreparable). PubMed, Cochrane Trials, and Scopus were queried in October 2022 using the criteria established in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Studies were included if they involved patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy with labral reconstruction or augmentation and reported preoperative and postoperative PROs at minimum 2-year follow-up. Only original research articles were included. Survivorship was defined as a nonconversion to total hip arthroplasty. Outcomes present in 3 or more studies underwent further statistical analysis with forest plots. Heterogeneity of studies was evaluated using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

Five studies were reviewed, including 359 revision hip arthroscopies (335 with complete follow-up) with a follow-up that ranged from 2.2 to 5.2 years. Four studies reported on outcomes after revision labral reconstruction and 1 study reported on labral augmentation. Two out of 5 included studies evaluated for statistical significance between preoperative and postoperative outcomes. Three out of 5 studies reported a rate of at least 70% for achieving minimal clinically important difference in at least 1 PRO. At minimum 2-year follow-up, survivorship ranged from 93.5% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients that underwent revision hip arthroscopy with labral reconstruction or augmentation demonstrated improvement in PROs with mixed rates of achieving clinical benefit and rates of survivorship at minimum 2-year follow-up ranging from 93.5% to 100%.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Variation in the Cost of Hip Arthroscopy for Labral Pathological Conditions: A Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite growing interest in delivering high-value orthopaedic care, the costs associated with hip arthroscopy remain poorly understood. By employing time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC), we aimed to characterize the cost composition of hip arthroscopy for labral pathological conditions and to identify factors that drive variation in cost.

METHODS

Using TDABC, we measured the costs of 890 outpatient hip arthroscopy procedures for labral pathological conditions across 5 surgeons at 4 surgery centers from 2015 to 2022. All patients were ≥18 years old and were treated by surgeons who each performed ≥20 surgeries during the study period. Costs were normalized to protect the confidentiality of internal hospital cost data. Descriptive analyses and multivariable linear regression were performed to identify factors underlying cost variation.

RESULTS

The study sample consisted of 515 women (57.9%) and 375 men (42.1%), with a mean age (and standard deviation) of 37.1 ± 12.7 years. Most of the procedures were performed in patients who were White (90.6%) or not Hispanic (93.4%). The normalized total cost of hip arthroscopy per procedure ranged from 43.4 to 203.7 (mean, 100 ± 24.2). Of the 3 phases of the care cycle, the intraoperative phase was identified as the largest generator of cost (>90%). On average, supply costs accounted for 48.8% of total costs, whereas labor costs accounted for 51.2%. A 2.5-fold variation between the 10th and 90th percentiles for total cost was attributed to supplies, which was greater than the 1.8-fold variation attributed to labor. Variation in total costs was most effectively explained by the labral management method (partial R2 = 0.332), operating surgeon (partial R2 = 0.326), osteoplasty type (partial R2 = 0.087), and surgery center (partial R2 = 0.086). Male gender (p < 0.001) and younger age (p = 0.032) were also associated with significantly increased costs. Finally, data trends revealed a shift toward labral preservation techniques over debridement during the study period (with the rate of such techniques increasing from 77.8% to 93.2%; Ptrend = 0.0039) and a strong correlation between later operative year and increased supply costs, labor costs, and operative time (p < 0.001 for each).

CONCLUSIONS

By applying TDABC to outpatient hip arthroscopy, we identified wide patient-to-patient cost variation that was most effectively explained by the method of labral management, the operating surgeon, the osteoplasty type, and the surgery center. Given current procedural coding trends, declining reimbursements, and rising health-care costs, these insights may enable stakeholders to design bundled payment structures that better align reimbursements with costs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Editorial Commentary: Irreparable, Symptomatic, Hip Labral Tears Should Be Reconstructed in Patients without Osteoarthritis. However, Comparison of the Two, as Well as Allograft versus Autograft Reconstruction, Is Challenging

Hip acetabular labrum plays a chondroprotective role by maintaining stability, providing a suction seal, and contributing to load distribution. In symptomatic patients without osteoarthritis, arthroscopic labral repair has strong clinical and biomechanical data to support its use. For irreparable tears, the labrum should be reconstructed. Biomechanically, labral reconstruction does not demonstrate superiority when compared to labral repair or the intact native labrum state. However, it is superior to labral excision. One challenge in making these comparisons is the heterogeneity in surgical technique. Labral reconstruction techniques can vary significantly. In terms of reconstruction, allograft offers the advantage of no donor site morbidity, but availability, costs, and risks must be considered. Autograft use is limited by donor site morbidity and increased operative time. Direct comparisons again show no clear evidence to suggest superiority of one over the other.

A comprehensive review of hip arthroscopy techniques and outcomes

Transforming the orthopedic landscape, hip arthroscopy pioneers a minimally invasive surgical approach for diagnosing and addressing hip pathologies. With its origins dating back to Burman's 1931 cadaveric study, this groundbreaking technique gained clinical relevance in 1939 through Takagi's report. However, the 1980s marked the actual emergence of hip arthroscopy for treating a wide range of hip disorders. Now, a staple in modern orthopedics, hip arthroscopy empowers patients with previously undiagnosed and untreated hip conditions, enabling them to obtain relief and reclaim their lives. By employing a compact camera and specialized tools, surgeons expertly navigate the hip joint, performing procedures from excising loose bodies and mending labral tears to addressing femoroacetabular impingement and tackling other intricate issues. This innovative approach has dramatically elevated patients' quality of life, allowing them to embrace targeted treatments and resume daily activities without resorting to lifestyle alterations.

Editorial Commentary: In Terms of Hip Arthroscopy Long-term Outcomes, Intra-articular Cartilage Damage Is More Important Than Hip Labral Treatment Method: The Second Habit of Highly Effective Surgeons

There is a large debate revolving around the optimal surgical management of hip labral tears. Currently, the literature tends to gravitate toward labral repair as the mainstay of treatment, followed by labral reconstruction when repair is not feasible. Some studies assert that there is no difference between labral repair versus debridement, whereas others support repair. Other studies support labral reconstruction. In the end, it is the quality of the cartilage that may be most important. Intra-articular cartilage damage is more important than the labral treatment method when it comes to hip arthroscopy long-term outcomes.

Over 50% of Studies Report Low-Back Pain Is Associated With Worse Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy When Compared With a Control Group: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To review outcomes of patients with low-back pathology undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Trials, and Scopus databases were queried in June 2022 to conduct this systematic review using the following terms: ("hip" OR "femoroacetabular impingement") AND ("arthroscopy" OR "arthroscopic") AND ("spine" OR "lumbar" OR "sacral" OR "hip-spine" OR "back") AND ("outcomes"). Articles were included if they reported on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and/or clinical benefit of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy with concomitant low-back pathology. The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Case reports, opinion articles, review articles, and technique articles were excluded from this study. Forest plots were created to analyze preoperative and postoperative outcomes among patients with low-back pathology.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in the review. There were 750 hips with low-back pathology and FAI (hip-spine syndrome) and 1,800 hips with only FAI (no hip-spine syndrome). All 14 studies reported PROs. In 4 studies in the group with hip-spine syndrome and 8 studies in the group with FAI without low-back pathology, the respective cohorts were reported to achieve the minimal clinically important difference in at least 1 PRO at a rate of 80%. Eight studies reported that patients with low-back pathology were associated with inferior outcomes or clinical benefit compared with patients without low-back pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy with concomitant low-back pathology can expect favorable outcomes, but outcomes are superior in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI alone compared with FAI with concomitant low-back pathology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Fixation strength in arthroscopic labral repair of the hip: A head-to-head comparison of the biomechanical performance of a biocompatible vs. all-suture anchor in the setting of acetabuloplasty

Much is known about the biomechanical performance of various types of suture anchors commonly used for labral fixation in the shoulder; however, similar studies in the hip are less common. We sought to compare all-suture and polyether ether ketone small-diameter anchors in the setting of labral repair during hip arthroscopy, with and without acetabuloplasty. We hypothesized that the biomechanical properties of the all-suture group when compared to polyether ether ketone anchors would be similar amongst native acetabula and significantly less following acetabuloplasty and that pullout forces would be reduced in the anterior and inferior regions of the acetabulum compared to the superior region. Bone density was measured in nine matched pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric acetabula in the superior, anterosuperior, and anterior regions. Acetabuloplasty was performed in all three regions, while the contralateral acetabulum was left in situ as a control. Suture anchors were placed such that one each of two different types was placed within each region. Specimens were tested in cyclic fatigue and loaded to failure. The all-suture group had significantly higher cyclic displacement compared to the polyether ether ketone, but there was no significant difference in ultimate load, regardless of acetabuloplasty. Amongst all non-resected specimens, the lowest bone density was observed consistently in the inferior region. Our results indicate that, with or without acetabuloplasty, a small-diameter polyether ether ketone anchor appears to be more stable than an all-suture anchor, which needs to be set first.

Mid- and Long-Term Outcomes Are Favorable for Patients With Borderline Dysplasia Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To evaluate midterm outcomes, long-term outcomes, and survivorship in the borderline dysplastic population after primary hip arthroscopy.

METHODS

A systematic review of current literature was performed with the following key words: "hip, "arthroscopy," "borderline dysplasia," "borderline hip dysplasia," "developmental dysplasia," "ten-year," "survivorship," "10-year," "5-year," "five year," "mid-term," "long-term," "outcomes," "arthroscopic," and "femoroacetabular impingement" in PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus in March 2022 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. The following information was recorded: title, author, publication date, study design, demographic, number of hips, follow-up time, study period, indications for hip arthroscopy, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), characteristics of patients converting to total hip arthroplasty (THA), and rates of secondary surgeries and conversion to THA were recorded. Survivorship was defined as not converting to THA. Kappa values for the title/abstract and full-text screening were calculated. Forest plots were created for PROs that were included in 3 or more studies.

RESULTS

Six articles comprising 413 hips were included in the study. Three studies were Level III evidence, and 3 studies were Level IV evidence. Average follow-up ranged from 5.7 to 12.2 years. One study defined borderline hip dysplasia as lateral center-edge angle 18-25° and 5 defined it as lateral center-edge angle 20-25°. All studies included PROs and reported significant improvement after surgery in at least one PRO. Three studies reported clinical benefit and across the studies at least 70% of patients achieved minimum clinically important difference in at least one PRO. Rates of undergoing revision hip arthroscopy and THA ranged from 2.1% to 7% and 0% to 24%, respectively. Tönnis grade 2, Tönnis angle >15, and Outerbridge Grade IV cartilage damage were identified as predictors of conversion to THA.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with borderline hip dysplasia undergoing primary hip arthroscopy demonstrated significant improvement in PROs at midterm and long-term follow-up. Survivorship at midterm follow-up was 98.2% (328/334 hips) and 76.3% (29/38 hips) at long-term follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Patients Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy Report Favorable Outcomes at Minimum 10 Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

(1) To evaluate minimum 10-year PROs (patient-reported outcomes) and survivorship after primary hip arthroscopy and (2) to identify predictors of failure for secondary arthroscopy and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted with the following key words: "hip arthroscopy," "long-term," "outcomes," "ten-year," "survivorship," "10-year," "15-year," "fifteen-year," 20-year," "twenty-year," and "femoroacetabular impingement" in PubMed and Embase in March 2022 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Level I to Level IV evidence was included and reported on minimum 10-year outcomes or greater after primary hip arthroscopy. Long-term studies were defined as minimum 10-year follow-up in accordance with established standards in the literature. Case reports, review articles, technique articles, and opinion articles were excluded. Articles not in English were excluded. Title, author, publication date, study design, demographic, number of hips, follow-up time, study period, indications for hip arthroscopy, PROs, predictors of failure for THA, and rates of secondary surgeries were recorded. Survivorship was defined as a nonconversion to THA. P < .05 was defined as statistical significance.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, 4 studies were Level III, and 8 studies were Level IV. A total of 1,344 hips were included, and follow-up ranged from 10 to 20 years. Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome was the most common indication for hip arthroscopy. Ten of the 12 studies reported on PROs, and 8 studies reported significant improvement after hip arthroscopy at long-term follow-up. The remaining 2 studies reported favorable outcomes that satisfied clinical benefit thresholds at minimum 10-year follow-up. Five studies reported clinical benefit where each patient cohort achieved 80% minimal clinically important difference and 75% patient acceptable symptomatic state for at least one PRO. Rates of secondary arthroscopy ranged from 4.5% to 24%, and rates of conversion to THA varied from 0% to 44.1%. Older age and chondral damage were the most commonly cited predictors for conversion to THA.

CONCLUSIONS

At long-term follow-up, patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy demonstrated favorable outcomes and variable rates of secondary surgeries. Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy within the last 20 years with Tönnis grade <1 and labral repair experienced greater than 90% survivorship. Chondral damage and older age were the most cited predictors for conversion to THA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Graft Options for Hip Labral Reconstruction

➢

Arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction is a complex procedure which is growing in use as indications, techniques, and surgical expertise advance.

➢

Graft selection is an important component of labral reconstruction based on relative advantages and disadvantages of available types of autografts and allografts.

➢

The ideal graft should mimic the native acetabular labrum form and function while also being affordable, readily available, and associated with low morbidity.

➢

High rates of patient satisfaction and positive patient-reported outcomes have been reported after labral reconstruction using several graft types.

Can Non-Contrast 3T MRI scans predict the type of labral procedure in hip arthroscopy?

PURPOSE

The study proposed a simple classification system that aimed at predicting the labral procedure during hip arthroscopy using images from unenhanced 3T MRI scans.

PATENTS AND METHODS

Forty patients undergoing hip arthroscopy had their MRI scans reviewed pre-operatively by one of two senior radiologists and classified into: type 1: stable labrum with intra-substance degeneration (no labral repair required), type 2: unstable labrum, no intra-substance degeneration (labral repair required), or type 3: unstable labrum with intra-substance degeneration (Labral repair not feasible). Hip arthroscopy is carried out by one of two surgeons and classified accordingly while blinded to the radiologists' assessment.

RESULTS

The pre-operative radiological classification managed to predict the labral procedure in 29 cases out of 40 (72.5%). The gamma value was 0.83, and the kappa value was 0.46 denoting moderate agreement. The inter-class correlation coefficient was 0.52 indicating moderate reliability.

CONCLUSION

The proposed classification showed a moderate agreement between the radiological findings and arthroscopic findings. As we cannot accurately correlate the MRI findings with the type of surgical management, the surgeon should be prepared for all scenarios of labral procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV (case series).

Removal of a Periarticular Cyst of the Hip Joint Using an Ultrasound-Based Minimally Invasive Technique - a Case Report

Introduction- Cystic lesions protruding into surrounding anatomical structures may decrease quality of life. Case presentation- In our case, the cyst was located periarticularly which indicated a potential need for open surgery. We used ultrasound-based minimally invasive arthroscopy technique. A 39-year-old-woman's ultrasonographic examination revealed delamination of the acetabular labrum and periarticular cyst located extra-articularly, compressing the iliopsoas muscle. The ultrasound-guided complete removal of the cyst was performed using shaver blade placed into its lumen through the skin incision. The acetabular labral tear was treated with a classic arthroscopy procedure. 5 weeks after the surgery the patient reported no pain and no functional impairment was detected. Conclusion-A well-known ultrasound diagnostic technique can save patients from more invasive procedures and bring benefits to surgeons.

Comparable Minimum 2-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Scores Between Circumferential and Segmental Labral Reconstruction for the Management of Irreparable Labral Tear and Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome in the Primary Setting: A Propensity-Matched Study

PURPOSE

To compare minimum 2-year follow-up patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) in patients who underwent primary acetabular circumferential and segmental labral reconstruction for irreparable labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

METHODS

Data were reviewed from August 2010 to December 2017. Patients with primary labral reconstruction and minimum 2-year follow-up 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 were included. Circumferential and segmental reconstruction were selected in each case based on the extent of the labral pathology. Exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip surgery/conditions, dysplasia, or Tönnis grade >1. Patients were propensity matched 1:1 based on age, sex, and body mass index. Secondary surgeries were reported. The P value was set at <.05.

RESULTS

In total, 144 hips were eligible, and 17 hips were lost to follow-up, leaving 127 hips (88.2%) for analysis. Eighty hips underwent a segmental reconstruction, and 47 hips underwent a circumferential reconstruction. Forty-seven hips with circumferential reconstruction were matched to 47 hips with segmental reconstruction. The average follow-up and age for the segmental and circumferential groups were 29.0 ± 7.8 and 27.9 ± 7.0 months (P = .732) and 43.1 ± 9.4 and 44.7 ± 10.2 years (P = .442) respectively. The segmental and circumferential groups were 48.9% and 51.1% female, respectively. The groups achieved significant and comparable improvement for all PROs and rates of secondary surgeries. No differences were found for achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS). The MCIDs for the segmental and circumferential groups were 76.7% and 77.8% for the mHHS, 64.9% and 77.8% for the HOS-SSS, 71.1% and 68.9% for the VAS, and 68.9% and 73.9% for the NAHS, respectively. The PASSs for the segmental and circumferential groups were 78.3% and 73.3% for the mHHS, 55.3% and 55.0% for the HOS-SSS, and 75.6% and 71.1% for the International Hip Outcome Tool 12, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

At minimum 2-year follow-up, patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for either circumferential or segmental labral reconstruction for irreparable labra and FAIS reported significant improvement and similar postoperative scores for all PROs, with no difference in psychometric outcomes and rate of secondary surgeries. A customized approach, using the extent of the irreparable labral tear, seems to be an appropriate strategy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Impact of bone deformities and labral and cartilage lesions on early functional results of arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement

INTRODUCTION

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a frequent cause of inguinal pain. Treatment failure rates range between 2.9% and 13.2%. The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of preoperative bone deformities (BD), labral lesions (LL) and cartilage lesions (CL) on clinical results of arthroscopic treatment of FAI.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A prospective operational study included patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI. All patients had full radiographic work-up and clinical assessment on Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), preoperatively and at 1year. Hips with Tönnis grade>1, coxa profunda [VCE (vertical center edge angle)>35°] or borderline dysplasia (VCE<25°) were excluded. The Czerny classification was used for the labrum and the Beck classification for the cartilage. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of preoperative BD, LL and CL on clinical results of arthroscopic treatment of FAI. The study hypothesis was that type of lesion does not influence early functional results at 1year, whatever the technique used for the labrum.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety-seven patients were included. Mean preoperative NAHS was 59.1±17.5. There were 145 patients with labral suture (73.6%), 42 with labral debridement (21.3%) and 10 with conservative treatment (5.1%). At 1year, mean NAHS was 88.1±15.3: i.e., a significant improvement (p<2.2×10^-16). Improvement was also significant in the debridement, non-operative and suture subgroups. BD showed significant correction in the overall population (alpha angle 48.2° postoperatively versus 66.7° preoperatively; crossing sign in 14.5% versus 62.9% of cases). There were no significant differences in functional scores according to extension or type of labral or cartilage lesion. At follow-up, 3 patients (1.5%) required repeat arthroscopy.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed that early functional results of arthroscopic treatment of FAI were unaffected by the severity of bone deformity (alpha and VCE angles), or extension or type of labral or cartilage lesion. Regardless of BD, LL and CL, 1-year clinical progression was satisfactory when all bone deformities were treated by the arthroscopic procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; prospective non-comparative study.

Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy: A Cohort-Based Survivorship Study With a Minimum of 2-Year Follow-up

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to determine which patient, provider, and surgical factors influence progression to total hip arthroplasty (THA) after hip arthroscopy (HA) through a large cohort-based registry.

METHODS

All patients ≥18 years who underwent unilateral HA in Ontario, Canada, between October 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016, were identified with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. The rate of THA after HA was reported using Kaplan-Meier survivorship analyses. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess which factors independently influenced survivorship.

RESULTS

A total of 2,545 patients (53.2% female, mean age 37.4 ± 11.8 years) were identified. A total of 237 patients (9.3%) were identified to have undergone THA at a median time of 2 years after HA, with an additional 6.3% requiring a revision arthroplasty at a median time of 1.1 years. Patients who underwent isolated labral resection (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.51 to 4.60) or in combination with osteochondroplasty (OCP) [HR: 2.11, 95% CI: 1.22 to 3.88] were more likely to undergo THA versus patients who underwent isolated labral repair or in combination with an OCP, respectively. Older age increased the risk for THA (HR: 14.0, 95% CI: 5.76 to 39.1), and treatment by the highest-volume HA surgeons was found to be protective (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.89).

DISCUSSION

Using our methods, the rate of THA after HA was 9.3% at 2 years. The rate of revision arthroplasty was 6.3% at 1 year. Patients who underwent labral resection, isolated OCP, and/or were of increased age were at increased independent risk of conversion to THA. Those treated by the highest-volume HA surgeons were found to be at reduced risk of conversion to THA.

Hip Labral Reconstruction with Capsular Autograft Augmentation

Multiple treatment options are available for patients presenting with a torn or deficient acetabular labrum. Biomechanical studies have demonstrated that the acetabular labrum may play a role in decreasing the risk of osteoarthritis and in maintaining long-term hip kinematics and stability. As such, repair or reconstruction of the labrum is often preferred over resection or debridement. In instances of a hypoplastic labrum, labral reconstruction or augmentation may be necessary even in a primary setting. Although reconstruction is a technique that should be in any hip arthroscopist's toolkit, allografts can be expensive and may not always be available when needed. In this Technical Note, we describe a labral augmentation with capsular autograft that diminishes donor-site morbidity associated with fascia lata autografts. This technique enables incorporation of healthy capsular tissue that allows for the recreation of the suction seal while avoiding some of the technically challenging aspects and costs of the conventional allograft labral reconstruction.

Surgical Treatment of Labral Tears: Debridement, Repair, and Reconstruction

Advances in hip preservation surgery have to lead to increased utilization of hip arthroscopy. With this, there has also been a growth in the understanding of various hip conditions, therefore, leading to an increase in hip conditions amenable to arthroscopic intervention. The acetabular hip labrum has been at the forefront of arthroscopic advances in the hip. The labrum is important for hip stability, provision of the suction seal, and joint proprioception. Given the labrum's central role in hip biomechanics, there is increasing emphasis on labral preservation in the form of debridement and repair. In revision settings, advanced techniques such as labral augmentation and reconstruction may play a role in the management of labral pathology. Appropriate management of the hip labrum at the time of surgery can be an important mediator of the outcome. As such, an understanding of the evolving evidence base and surgical indications and techniques are integral to the treatment and management of labral pathology.

Characterizing irreparable: a retrospective machine learning analysis of patients who undergo primary labral reconstruction during hip arthroscopy

Hip labrum reconstruction has been demonstrated to be a viable option for patients with irreparable labral tears. However, there is a lack of data analyzing patient and labral characteristics in those undergoing primary hip labral reconstruction. To use a machine learning technique to subcategorize patients who underwent labral reconstruction during primary hip arthroscopy and to determine if there may be varying pathology resulting in severe labral damage. Patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction between 2015 and 2018 were included. Patients with a prior ipsilateral hip surgery, who were unwilling to participate, or had incomplete preoperative data were excluded. Agglomerative hierarchical clustering analysis was conducted to identify the subgroups of patients. A comparison was performed for preoperative characteristics, intraoperative findings and procedures. Of the 191 patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction and were eligible, 174 were included in the clustering analysis. Two distinct groups were identified (Group 1: 112 patients, 64.4%; Group 2: 62 patients, 35.6%). Group 1 had a significantly higher proportion of females (61.6% versus 43.5%; P &lt; 0.05), combined Seldes I and II labral tears (94.6% versus 54.8%; P &lt; 0.05), and larger tears. Group 2 had a significantly higher rate of labral calcification (82.3% versus 3.6%; P &lt; 0.05). The results of this study demonstrate two distinct groups of patients who underwent primary hip labral reconstruction: those with severe labral damage, and those with a calcified labrum. Approximately two-thirds were placed in the group with severe labral damage, while the other third had diminished quality secondary to calcific changes. Retrospective comparative trial; Level of Evidence, 3.

Hip Instability in the Athlete: Anatomy, Etiology, and Management

In this review, the recent literature evaluating the anatomic considerations, etiology, and management options for athletes with hip instability are investigated. Studies on the osseous, chondrolabral capsuloligamentous, and dynamic muscular contributions to hip stability are highlighted. Microinstability, iatrogenic instability, and femoroacetabular impingement-induced instability are discussed with a focus on demographic and outcomes research in athletes. Surgical techniques including both open and arthroscopic approaches are additionally evaluated.

Graft Options in Hip Labral Reconstruction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The last decade has seen a boom in hip arthroscopy with refined indications. Improved understanding of pathoanatomy and disease progression has allowed for the development of advanced techniques. Labral reconstruction has been developed to substitute a non-functional or absent labrum. It has become an important technique in the armamentarium of high-volume arthroscopic hip surgeons.

RECENT FINDINGS

Basic science studies have improved understanding of hip biomechanics in the presence and absence of a labrum with a labral reconstruction allowing for reconstitution of normalcy. Current techniques have shown success with autograft and allograft tissue options. While autograft tissue allows for easy access intra-operatively and maintains patient biology, donor site morbidity is possible. Allografts negate donor site morbidity and allow for an abundance of tissue but can be resource-intensive and face availability concerns. Recent studies support outcomes of labral reconstructions using both autograft and allograft. Promising results have also allowed for performing labral reconstruction in a primary setting. Labral reconstruction can be successfully performed using both autograft and allograft. Patient biology should be respected, and native hip biomechanics restored. The literature is plentiful for appropriate surgical decision-making allowing the surgeon with multiple graft choices depending on training, experience, and resources.

Capsular Reconstruction of the Hip Using Modified Kite Technique: A Technical Guide for Efficient Graft Management and Fixation

Preserving capsular integrity has become an important principle of hip preservation surgery given the increasingly recognized deleterious effects of instability in cases of capsular insufficiency. When capsular tissue is deficient, capsular reconstruction may be indicated to restore function of the iliofemoral ligament and improve hip biomechanics. To date, few studies have presented technical guidance on performing arthroscopic capsular reconstruction of the hip. In this Technical Note, we introduce a modified kite technique for arthroscopic entry, control, and fixation of a capsular reconstruction graft. Similar to flying a kite with multiple fly lines, and to the previously described kite technique for hip labral reconstruction, the principles of this method are founded on the belief that control sutures within a pulley system facilitate safe and efficient graft management during capsular reconstruction procedures.

Femoroacetabular Impingement and Management of Labral Tears in the Athlete

Femoroacetabular impingement and associated labral tearing is a common source of hip pain in athletes. This article reviews the hip joint anatomy and complex interplay between alterations on the femoral and acetabular sides, in addition to evaluation of soft tissue stabilizers and spinopelvic parameters. Symptom management with a focus on arthroscopic treatment of abnormal bony morphology and labral repair or reconstruction is discussed. In select patients with persistent pain who have failed conservative measures, hip arthroscopy with correction of bony impingement and labral repair or reconstruction has yielded good to excellent results in recreational and professional athletes.

[Research progress in arthroscopic treatment of acetabular labrum injury]

Objective

To review the surgical methods of arthroscopy in the treatment of acetabular labrum injury, and to provide reference for clinical treatment.

Methods

The literature about the surgical methods and clinical results of hip arthroscopy in the treatment of acetabular labrum injury was reviewed and analyzed.

Results

In the early stages of hip arthroscopy, the removal of the torn labrum is the primary treatment option. The current principles of treatment are based on the specific circumstances of a torn labrum, including acetabular labrum debridement, acetabular labrum repair, acetabular labrum reconstruction, and acetabular labrum augmentation.

Conclusion

Hip arthroscopy has become the preferred technique for the treatment of acetabular labrum injury. Labral repair is still the first choice, and labral reconstruction is used when acetabular labrum injury cannot be repaired.

Arthroscopic acetabular labral reconstruction: a review

The function and importance of the acetabular labrum in hip biomechanics have been determined. A labral tear is one of the most common findings in the hip preservation field, commonly associated with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome. It has been established that the restoration of labral anatomy and function are key factors to improve patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) and psychometric tools following arthroscopic hip arthroscopy in the context of FAI syndrome. Labral repair or refixation is currently the gold-standard surgical option when facing labral tears, with clinical mid to long-term data supporting its use. Labral selective debridement has proven to be a valid alternative in selective patients. Acetabular labral reconstruction has risen as an alternative to labral excision or resection when repair is not an option due to labral tissue deficiency. Restoring the labral sealing mechanism is the goal behind the acetabular labral reconstruction. It has been proven that labral reconstruction leads to superior PROMs when compared with resection. This review presents an analysis of the indications, techniques, and outcomes for arthroscopic acetabular labral reconstruction.

Hip preservation

Classical indications for hip preserving surgery are: femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI) (intra- and extra-articular), hip dysplasia, slipped capital femoral epiphysis, residual deformities after Perthes disease, avascular necrosis of the femoral head.

Pre-operative evaluation of the pathomorphology is crucial for surgical planning including radiographs as the basic modality and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and/or computed tomography (CT) to evaluate further intra-articular lesions and osseous deformities.

Two main mechanisms of intra-articular impingement have been described:

(1) Inclusion type FAI (‘cam type’).

(2) Impaction type FAI (‘pincer type’).

Either arthroscopic or open treatment can be performed depending on the severity of deformity.

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis often results in a cam-like deformity of the hip. In acute cases a subcapital re-alignment (modified Dunn procedure) of the femoral epiphysis is an effective therapy.

Perthes disease can lead to complex femoro-acetabular deformity which predisposes to impingement with/without joint incongruency and requires a comprehensive diagnostic workup for surgical planning.

Developmental dysplasia of the hip results in a static overload of the acetabular rim and early osteoarthritis. Surgical correction by means of periacetabular osteotomy offers good long-term results.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:630-640. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190074

Patients With a Hypotrophic Labrum Achieve Similar Outcomes After Primary Labral Repair Compared With Patients With a Normal-Sized Labrum: A Matched Cohort Analysis of 346 Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

PURPOSE

To compare patient functional scores and rates of achieving minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) between patients with a hypotrophic labrum with those with a normal labrum width at a minimum 1-year follow-up from arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

METHODS

Data from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between November 2015 and July 2018 for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome were analyzed. Baseline demographic data, preoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and minimum 1-year PROMs, including Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score, international Hip Outcome Tool 12 questions, and visual analog scale for pain and satisfaction were recorded. The labrum size was determined using an arthroscopic probe at the 12- to 2-o'clock position with a hypotrophic labrum being defined as <4 mm and normal labrum defined as having a width between 4 and 7 mm on the articular side. Patients with hypotrophic labrum were matched 1:1 by age and body mass index to patients with normal labrum width.

RESULTS

A total of 346 patients were included in the study with an average age of 31.4 ± 11.9 and a majority being female (72.0%). There were 173 in each of the normal and hypotrophic groups. There were no significant differences seen in 1-year PROMs between the 2 groups (P > .05 for all). The normal labrum group achieved MCID at a rate of 75% to 84% and PASS at a rate of 51% to 70%. The hypotrophic labrum group achieved MCID at a rate of 70% to 85% and PASS at a rate of 57% to 71%. There were no significant differences in rates between each group (P > .05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with an intraoperative finding of labral hypotrophy achieve 1-year meaningful clinical outcome at the same rate as those with normal labral width following arthroscopic labral repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Case-control study.

Editorial Commentary: Hip Labral Reconstruction: A Necessary Skill for Hip Arthroscopy Surgeons

The surgical treatment of labral deficiency has generated a tremendous amount of discussion and controversy among hip arthroscopists. The surgical reconstruction of the labrum has been viewed as the natural next step, after debridement and repair, in the advancement of our ability to treat patients with hip labral pathology. However, the indications for labral replacement and the profile of patients who would benefit from this complex intervention are still under debate. Every hip arthroscopist must have the technical ability to perform reconstruction when indicated. Repair or debridement does not always achieve best patient outcome.

Comparison of Suction Seal and Contact Pressures Between 270° Labral Reconstruction, Labral Repair, and the Intact Labrum

PURPOSE

To biomechanically compare the suction seal, contact area, contact pressures, and peak forces of the intact native labrum, torn labrum, 12- to 3-o'clock labral repair, and 270° labral reconstruction in the hip.

METHODS

A cadaveric study was performed using 8 fresh-frozen hemipelvises with intact labra and without osteoarthritis. Intra-articular pressure maps were produced for each specimen using an electromechanical testing system under the following conditions: (1) intact labrum, (2) labral tear, (3) labral repair between the 12- and 3-o'clock positions, and (4) 270° labral reconstruction using iliotibial band allograft. Specimens were examined in neutral position, 20° of extension, and 60° of flexion. In each condition, contact pressure, contact area, and peak force were obtained. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to identify differences in biomechanical parameters among the 3 conditions. Qualitative differences in suction seal were compared between labral repair and labral reconstruction using the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Repeated-measures analysis of variance for contact area in neutral position, extension, and flexion showed statistically significant differences between the normalized study states (P < .05). Post hoc analysis showed significantly larger contact areas measured in labral repair specimens than in labral reconstruction specimens in the extension and flexion positions. Region-of-interest analysis for the normalized contact area in the extension and flexion positions, as well as normalized contact pressures in neutral position, showed statistically significant differences between the labral states (P < .05). Finally, 8 labral repairs (100%) versus only 1 labral reconstruction (12.5%) retained the manually tested suction seal (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this in vitro biomechanical model, 270° labral reconstruction resulted in decreased intra-articular contact area and loss of suction seal when compared with labral repair. Clinically, labral reconstruction may not restore the biomechanical characteristics of the native labrum as compared with labral repair.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Labral reconstruction may result in lower intra-articular hip contact area and loss of suction seal, affecting the native biomechanical function of the acetabular labrum. Further biomechanical studies and clinical studies are necessary to determine whether there are any long-term consequences of 270° labral reconstruction.

All-suture anchors in arthroscopic acetabular labral repair: our experience

Background:

Over the past years, the role of the acetabular labrum in hip joint biomechanics and its relations with joint health has been of particular interest. There is a good clinical improvement of patients in whom the acetabular labrum is preserved during arthroscopic hip surgery. The purpose of this study is to report the results of arthroscopic repair of labral tears at a medium term follow up.

Materials and methods:

We performed a retrospective review of all cases that underwent hip arthroscopy at our Institution from January 2013 until December 2018. There were 24 patients, 13 males and 11 females, and their mean age at the time of surgery was 29, 42 years (range, 19 to 43 years). All patients were treated by the same surgeon with an extracapsular OUT-IN approach. Suture was performed using a non-absorbable suture anchor all-suture. Clinical assessment was performed at December 2019 using a modified Harris hip score (mHHS), hip outcomes score activities of daily living (HOS ADL), hip outcomes score activities of sport scale (HOS SS). All patients with acetabular labrum injury had femoro-acetabular impingement.

Results:

The mean overall values in the preoperative period were 67.21 ± 10.31 for mHHS, 70.04 ± 12.11 for HOS-ADL and 60.06 ± 14.58 for HOS –SS. The results obtained in the re-evaluations of patients in December 2019 with a mean follow-up of 38, 3 months (minimum 1 year) are on average 82.17 ± 11.36 for mHHS, 83.00 ± 12.80 for HOS-ADL and 76.09 ± 18.52 for HOS-SS.

Conclusions:

The progress of knowledge and the advancement of diagnostic and therapeutic skills has led to a greater awareness of the importance of treating acetabular labrum tears. Arthroscopic treatment with suture appear to be a good option for these patients and we had encouraging results in our center. (www.actabiomedica.it)