Arthroscopic debridement versus refixation of the acetabular labrum associated with femoroacetabular impingement

Editorial Commentary: Trends in Hip Arthroscopy Require Rapid Dissemination From Higher-Volume and Academic Surgeons to the Greater Orthopaedic Community

Trends in hip arthroscopy show that labral repair and preservation, capsular repair and preservation, and treatment of femoroacetabular impingement during hip arthroscopy are associated with superior short-term and mid- to longer-term outcomes. Hip arthroscopy, and in particular arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement correction, is in its infancy compared with many other orthopaedic procedures. As we assimilate knowledge, data, and evidence-based research, it is critical to evaluate surgical trends and how they affect our management of these patients and pathologies. However, it is important to recognize that there is great variability with regards to surgical volume and awareness of impending evidence-based research for relatively newer procedures such as hip arthroscopy. This can lead to delays for incorporating newer evidence-based techniques. The gap is closing, but the time required to close this disparity in management trends between higher-volume/academic surgeons and the orthopaedic community as a whole could be shorter. Whether this delay for adapting evidence-based trends is consistent across the spectrum of orthopaedic surgery or specific to smaller subspecialty areas such as hip arthroscopy is unclear. Regardless, it is essential that those who are performing the larger volume of cases and research must raise our voices, turn up our loudspeakers, and publish, present, and use social media platforms to spread the word of the latest evidence-based trends quickly! It is equally critical for the greater orthopaedic community to listen for the benefit of patients. If all parties collaborate, we can get up to speed in a timelier manner and achieve the best-possible outcomes together.

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.

Editorial Commentary: Extreme Hip Labral Size (Both Small and Large) Shows Inferior Outcomes After Arthroscopic Labral Repair With Femoroacetabular Impingement Treatment

Arthroscopic management of hip femoroacetabular impingement shows reliable improvement in pain and patient-reported outcomes, high survivorship, and low conversion to total hip arthroplasty, particularly in the absence of dysplasia. Concomitant labral repair-or augmentation versus reconstruction when indicated- consistently shows better results than labral debridement. The effect of labral size on outcomes has been studies in several series. Some studies show that smaller labra show inferior outcomes after repair, others show labral size makes no difference in outcomes, and one showed that patients large labra actually had worse outcomes. Perhaps labral size at either extreme does worse. Labral size is likely to remain one of many factors worth evaluating when prognosticating repair outcomes or indicating when advanced reconstructive options are warranted.

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.

Outcomes of Isolated Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair Compared With Concomitant Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair and Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair: A Propensity-Matched Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

Background

Both gluteal and labral tears are common sources of hip pain, but no studies have evaluated how concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) affect outcomes after endoscopic gluteus/minimus repair.

Purpose

(1) To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinically significant outcomes achievements between patients who underwent endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus and arthroscopic hip labral repair with correction of FAIS versus endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair and (2) to define threshold scores required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool, and visual analog scale for pain in these patients.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Patients who underwent primary endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair between 2012 and 2020 were identified. Those who underwent concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of FAIS with femoroplasty or acetabuloplasty as indicated were propensity matched in a 1 to 1 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index to patients who underwent gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair. Patients who completed the study PROs were assessed preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Threshold scores required to achieve the MCID and PASS thresholds were calculated.

Results

A total of 32 patients who underwent simultaneous gluteal and labral repair (G+L) were matched to 32 patients who underwent gluteal repair without labral repair (G); 75% of patients in the G cohort underwent labral debridement, while 25% in this cohort received no labral treatment. A significant difference was observed between groups in preoperative mHHS scores (G+L, 54.4 ± 12.9 vs G, 46.3 ± 14; P = .048) but no differences in any other PRO scores (P≥ .207). The MCID/PASS thresholds were as follows: Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (11.14/83.82), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (16.07/59.72), mHHS (11.47/70.95), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (13.73/45.49), and visual analog scale for pain (14.30/22). There were no significant differences in MCID or PASS achievement rates between the 2 groups (P≥ .108).

Conclusion

Patients who underwent combined G+L demonstrated comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes achievement rates to patients who underwent G, highlighting sustained successful outcomes for patients with gluteal tendon pathology and concomitant FAIS and labral tears.

Best practice guidelines for clinical and radiological assessment of patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Results from the ISHA International Delphi Consensus Project-Phase 2

In 2018, the International Society for Hip Preservation Surgery (ISHA) initiated a series of Delphi consensus studies to identify the global hip preservation community's current opinion on best practices for different facets of hip preservation surgery. Arthroscopic procedures to treat hip pathologies, such as femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) are now established in mainstream orthopaedic practice. This study establishes recommendations for the investigation of patients with suspected FAIS. The investigation has focused on the three phases of the diagnostic process-patient history, physical examination and special investigations. Our expert panel consisted of 174 international orthopaedic surgeons with expertise in hip preservation surgery, thereby making recommendations generalisable across the globe. After three rounds of survey and analysis with 174 participants per round, our study achieved consensus at a minimum agreement threshold of 80.0% on 55 statements pertaining to the assessment of patients with FAIS. We encourage our junior and senior hip arthroscopy colleagues internationally to consider these statements both to standardize the clinical and radiological assessment of patients with FAIS and to aid in the design of future research.

Outcomes of arthroscopy of the hip for femoroacetabular impingement based on intraoperative assessment using the Outerbridge classification

Aims

Hip arthroscopy (HA) has become the treatment of choice for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). However, less favourable outcomes following arthroscopic surgery are expected in patients with severe chondral lesions. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of HA in patients with FAI and associated chondral lesions, classified according to the Outerbridge system.

Methods

A systematic search was performed on four databases. Studies which involved HA as the primary management of FAI and reported on chondral lesions as classified according to the Outerbridge classification were included. The study was registered on PROSPERO. Demographic data, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, and rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) were collected.

Results

A total of 24 studies were included with a total of 3,198 patients (3,233 hips). Patients had significantly less improvement in PROMs if they had Outerbridge grade III and IV lesions (p = 0.012). Compared with microfracture, autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) resulted in significantly reduced rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.042) and of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.038). Chondral repair procedures in these patients also did not significantly reduce the rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.931), or of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.218). However, compared with microfracture, AMIC significantly reduced the rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.001) and of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.011) in these patients. Those with Outerbridge grade III and IV lesions also had significantly increased rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.029) and of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.023) if they had associated lesions of the acetabulum and femoral head. Those who underwent labral debridement had a significantly increased rate of conversion to THA compared with those who underwent labral repair (p = 0.015).

Conclusion

There is universal improvement in PROMs following HA in patients with FAI and associated chondral lesions. However, those with Outerbridge grade III and IV lesions had significantly less improvement in PROMs and a significantly increased rate of conversion to THA than those with Outerbridge grade I and II. This suggests that the outcome of HA in patients with FAI and severe articular cartilage damage may not be favourable.

Labral Reconstruction via Capsular Augmentation Maintains Perfusion to the Acetabular Labrum and Locally Transferred Autograft: An in Vivo Laser Doppler Flowmetry Analysis

Background

The purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of arthroscopic labral repair with capsular augmentation on blood flow in vivo with use of laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) to measure microvascular perfusion of the labrum and autograft tissue.

Methods

The present prospective case series included patients ≥18 years old who underwent arthroscopic acetabular labral repair with capsular augmentation; all procedures were performed by a single surgeon between 2018 and 2022. The LDF probe measured microvascular blood flow flux within 1 mm3 of the surrounding labral and capsular tissue of interest. Mean baseline measurements of flux were compared with readings immediately following capsular elevation and after completing labral augmentation. Blood flux changes were expressed as the percent change from the baseline measurements.

Results

The present study included 41 patients (24 men [58.5%] and 17 women [41.5%]) with a mean age (and standard deviation) of 31.3 ± 8.4 years, a mean BMI of 24.6 ± 3.4 kg/m2, a mean lateral center-edge of angle 35.3° ± 4.9°, a mean Tönnis angle of 5.8° ± 5.8°, and a mean arterial pressure of 93.7 ± 10.9 mm Hg. Following capsular elevation, the mean percent change in capsular blood flow flux was significantly different from baseline (-9.24% [95% confidence interval (CI), -18.1% to -0.04%]; p < 0.001). Following labral augmentation, the mean percent change in labral blood flow flux was significantly different from baseline both medially (-22.3% [95% CI, -32.7% to -11.9%]; p < 0.001) and laterally (-32.5% [95% CI, -41.5% to -23.6%]; p = 0.041). There was no significant difference between the changes in medial and lateral perfusion following repair (p = 0.136).

Conclusions

Labral repair with capsular augmentation sustains a reduced blood flow to the native labrum and capsular tissue at the time of fixation. The biological importance of this reduction is unknown, but these findings may serve as a benchmark for other labral preservation techniques and support future correlations with clinical outcomes.

Level of Evidence

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

Low Rates of 5-Year Secondary Surgery and Postoperative Complications After Primary Hip Arthroscopy in More Than 30,000 Patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate 90-day complications, 5-year secondary surgery rates, and risk factors for secondary surgery following primary hip arthroscopy performed for femoroacetabular impingement and/or labral tears using a large national dataset.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted using the PearlDiver Mariner151 database. Patients with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, diagnosis codes for femoroacetabular impingement and/or labral tear undergoing primary hip arthroscopy with femoroplasty, acetabuloplasty, and/or labral repair between 2015 and 2021 were identified. Those with concomitant International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes for infection, neoplasm, or fracture were excluded, as were patients with a history of previous hip arthroscopy or total hip arthroplasty, or age ≥70 years. Rates of complications within 90 days of surgery were assessed. Five-year rates of secondary surgery-revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty-were determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis, and risk factors for secondary surgery were identified by multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 31,623 patients underwent primary hip arthroscopy from October 2015 to April 2021, with annual volumes ranging from 5,340 to 6,343 surgeries per year. Femoroplasty was the most frequent surgical procedure (performed in 81.1% of surgical encounters), followed by labral repair (72.6%) and acetabuloplasty (33.0%). Ninety-day postoperative complication rates were low, with 1.28% of patients experiencing any complication. The 5-year secondary surgery rate was 4.9% (N = 915 patients). Multivariate logistic regression identified age <20 years (odds ratio [OR] 1.50; P < .001), female sex (OR 1.33; P < .001), class I obesity (body mass index 30-34.9: OR 1.30; P = .04), and class II/III obesity (body mass index ≥35.0: OR 1.29; P = .02) as independent predictors of secondary surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of primary hip arthroscopy, 90-day adverse events were low at 1.28%, and the 5-year secondary surgery rate was 4.9%. Age younger than 20 years, female sex, and obesity were risk factors for secondary surgery, suggesting the need for increased surveillance in these patient groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Recovery After Hip Arthroscopy in Patients With Combined Femoroacetabular Impingement and Labral Tears Compared With Isolated Pathology

Background

Outcomes for patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) treated with hip arthroscopy can differ depending on whether there is underlying intra-articular pathology.

Purpose

To evaluate the outcomes of patients after undergoing hip arthroscopy depending on their underlying pathology (isolated FAI, isolated labral tear, or combined FAI and a labral tear) using the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12).

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A total of 75 patients diagnosed with FAI with or without labral tears and isolated labral tears who underwent hip arthroscopy performed by the same surgeon at a single institution from January 2014 to December 2019 were included in this study. All patients had at least 2 years of follow-up data. Patients were divided into 3 groups as follows: patients with FAI and an intact labrum; patients with an isolated labral tear; and patients with combined FAI and a labral tear. The iHOT-12 scores at 1.5, 3, 6, 12, 18, and >24 months postoperatively were compared and analyzed. Outcome scores were also evaluated in terms of the substantial clinical benefit (SCB) and the patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS).

Results

Of 75 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy, 14 had FAI, 23 had labral tears, and 38 had both. All groups showed significant improvements on the iHOT-12 from preoperative to the final follow-up (FAI, from 37.64 ± 3.77 to 93.64 ± 1.50; labral tear, from 33.70 ± 3.55 to 93 ± 1.24; combined, from 28.55 ± 3.15 to 93.03 ± 0.88) (P < .001 for all). However, compared with other groups, the patients with FAI and a labral tear had lower scores at 1.5, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively (P < .001), highlighting a slower rate of recovery. For all groups, recovery to normal function according to the SCB was 100% at 12 months, and satisfaction according to the PASS was 100% at 18 months postoperatively.

Conclusion

The final iHOT-12 scores were similar at 18 months regardless of the pathology treated; however, patients with FAI and a labral tear took longer to reach their plateau.

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.

The Vascularization Course of Labral Autograft and Its Effect on Tissue Healing: Acetabular Labral Augmentation Versus Labral Reconstruction in a Porcine Model

BACKGROUND

The preservation of the native labral vascularization is assumed to be the potential advantage of acetabular labral augmentation, the effect of which remains unknown.

PURPOSE

To identify the vascular distribution within the labral autograft and its effect on the healing process between labral augmentation (AUG) and reconstruction (RECON) in a porcine model.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

A total of 36 pigs randomly underwent unilateral labral augmentation or reconstruction (AUG group, n = 18; RECON group, n = 18). The pigs were randomly sacrificed at 6, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively. The labral autografts were harvested for macroscopic evaluation and histologic assessment. The labral autograft was zoned into 2 halves to observe the vascular distribution: the capsular half (zone I) and the articular half (zone II). Each zone was divided into 2 parts: the peripheral part (IA and IIA) and the part attached to the acetabulum (IB and IIB).

RESULTS

At 6 weeks, there existed more vascular ingrowth in zone I, whereas zone IIB appeared nearly avascular in both groups. At 12 weeks, the area with the greatest vascularity was zone II in the RECON group and zone IA in the AUG group. The vascularity was concentrated at zones IA and IIA in both groups at 24 weeks. The labral autografts were hypertrophic with sufficient filling of the labral defect in both groups at 6 weeks. At 12 weeks, an insufficient volume of the articular half was observed in 3 of 6 labral autografts in the RECON group, while all autografts remained well integrated with the chondrolabral junction in the AUG group. At 24 weeks, unsatisfactory merging of the labral autograft with the cartilage at the articular side was found in 2 of 6 labral autografts in the RECON group, which was not observed in the AUG group despite the sufficient volume of autografts labrum in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Slow vascular ingrowth within the articular half might account for the poor healing of the reconstructed labral autograft. Labral augmentation provides the possibility of better tissue healing because of the preservation of the original chondrolabral junction compared with labral reconstruction.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Labral augmentation might be a feasible alternative to labral reconstruction under the condition of viable labral remnants.

Primary Arthroscopic Labral Management: Labral Repair and Complete Labral Reconstruction Both Offer Durable, Promising Results at Minimum 5-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of the acetabular labrum's role in hip joint biomechanics has led to a greater focus on the conservation and restoration of normal labral anatomic characteristics; however, labral repair is often not possible in the setting of severe intrasubstance damage or deficiency.

PURPOSE

To compare 5-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes between hips treated with primary complete arthroscopic labral reconstruction and those treated with primary labral repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

All hips that underwent primary labral repair or reconstruction by the senior surgeon between January 2015 and December 2015 were included. Hips that had undergone a previous intra-articular procedure were excluded. Visual analog scales and patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments were completed by patients within 1 week before surgery as a baseline measurement, between 22 and 26 months postoperatively for 2-year outcomes, and between 58 and 62 months for 5-year outcomes. PRO scores collected included the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool, and the visual analog scale for pain and satisfaction. Pain and satisfaction were assessed using visual analog scales.

RESULTS

A total of 68 primary labral repairs and 62 primary complete labral reconstructions were included in the final analysis. Patients in the reconstruction cohort were older (38.3 vs 29.9 years; P < .001), had a higher incidence of severe labral tearing (62.90% vs 5.88%; P < .001), required a greater number of concomitant procedures (P < .001), and were more likely to have Beck grade III or IV chondral damage (12.94% vs 1.47%; P < .001). Both groups demonstrated statistically significant increases in outcome scores at minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients who underwent labral reconstruction had a significantly greater increase in mHHS from the preoperative assessment to latest follow-up compared with patients undergoing labral repair (27.43 vs 17.13; P = .04). No statistically significant differences between the 2 cohorts were found in achievement of minimal clinically important difference, Patient Acceptable Symptom State, maximum outcome improvement, and substantial clinical benefit at latest follow-up (P > .05). In total, 2 patients in the repair cohort and 3 patients in the reconstruction cohort required revision arthroscopy (P = .574). Further, 1 patient from each group converted to arthroplasty (P = .947).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that primary complete labral reconstruction is a viable surgical option for hips with moderate to severe labral pathology. At minimum 5-year follow-up, labral reconstruction produced similar outcomes to labral repair despite less favorable preoperative patient characteristics in the reconstruction cohort.

Revision Surgery and Progression to Total Hip Arthroplasty After Surgical Correction of Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a major cause of hip pain in young adults and athletes. Surgical treatment of FAI is recommended in cases of failed nonoperative treatment that have the typical clinical and radiographic findings. At present, the role of risk factors for revision surgery and progression to total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with FAI is still unclear.

PURPOSE

To investigate the possible association between (1) rate of revision and progression to THA and (2) patient characteristics, type of lesion, family history of hip disease, type of intervention, radiographic parameters, physical examination, and pre- and postoperative scores.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

The present systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. In October 2020, the main online databases were accessed. All articles concerning surgical correction for selected patients with FAI were accessed. Patient characteristics, type of intervention, radiographic parameters, physical examination, and pre- and postoperative scores were assessed. The outcomes of interest were the possible association between these variables and the rate of revision and subsequent progression to THA using a multivariate analysis through the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Data from 99 studies (9357 procedures) were collected. The median follow-up was 30.9 months (interquartile range, 24.0-45.0). The mean ± SD age was 33.4 ± 9.3 years; mean body mass index (BMI), 24.8 ± 4.8; percentage right side, 55.8% ± 8.0%; and percentage female sex, 47.5% ± 20.4%. The overall rate of revision was 5.29% (351 of 6641 patients), while the rate of subsequent progression to THA was 3.78% (263 of 6966 patients). Labral debridement (P < .0001), preoperative acetabular index (P = .01), and BMI (P = .03) all showed evidence of a statistically positive association with increased rates of THA. No other statistically significant associations were found between patient characteristics, type of lesion, family history of hip disease, type of intervention, radiographic parameters, physical examination, or pre- and postoperative scores and the rate of revision and/or progression to THA.

CONCLUSION

Although surgical procedures to treat FAI led to satisfactory outcomes, there was a revision rate of 5.29% in the 9357 procedures in the present systematic review. The rate of progression to THA after a median follow-up of 30 months was 3.78%. Patients who have a higher BMI and/or have a pathologic acetabular index and/or undergo labral debridement during correction of FAI are more at risk for a subsequent THA. We advocate additional education of this patient population in terms of expected outcomes and suggest surgical labral repair instead of debridement if needed.

Arthroscopic Debridement Versus Refixation of the Acetabular Labrum Associated With Femoroacetabular Impingement: Updated Mean 7-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Short- and midterm follow-up studies suggest that arthroscopic labral refixation/preservation leads to superior outcomes compared with labral excision/debridement.

PURPOSE

To update the previous early (16 months) and midterm (mean, 42 months) follow-up of this cohort, which reported better patient-reported outcome measures and lower failure rates in the repair/refixation group.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

The authors identified patients who underwent labral debridement/focal labral excision during a period before the development of labral repair techniques. A consecutive group of patients within the labral debridement group thought to be repairable with the authors' current arthroscopic techniques were compared with a group of consecutive patients who underwent labral repair/refixation. In 46 hips, the labrum was focally excised/debrided consistent with pincer- or combined pincer- and cam-type impingement; in 54 hips, the labrum was repaired/refixed. Subjective outcomes were measured with the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain preoperatively and postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean age was 34.0 years in the debridement group and 28.3 years in the repair/refixation group, with a mean follow-up of 7.3 years (range, 2-13.6 years). At the mean follow-up of 7.3 years, subjective outcomes were significantly improved (P < .01) for both groups compared with preoperative scores. The mHHS (P = .008), SF-12 score (P = .012), and VAS pain score (P = .002) were all significantly better for the repair/refixation group compared with the debridement group. Although most recent outcomes for both groups fell slightly at the mean follow-up of 7.3 years in comparison with the 16-month and 3.5-year follow-ups, these differences were not significant. However, the failure rate in the debridement group did get significantly worse (P = .014). Good to excellent results were 47.7% in the debridement group and 86.3% in the refixation group (P < .001), and failure rates were 30.4% (debridement) and 13% (refixation) (P = .033). There were 4 revisions in the debridement group and 3 revisions in the refixation group.

CONCLUSION

Longer term, >7-year follow-up comparing focal labral excision/debridement with repair/refixation revealed better patient-reported outcomes and lower failure rates in the labral repair/refixation cohort. Additionally, despite an absolute decrease in patient-related outcome scoring and number of good/excellent results in both groups compared with the 3.5-year report, there was a significantly greater increase in failure rates over time for the excision/debridement group with better maintenance of good to excellent results in the repair/refixation group.

Prehabilitation and Rehabilitation Program for Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Acetabular Labral Repair: A Comprehensive 5-Phase Patient-Guided Program

Background:

Many of the current rehabilitation programs for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy fail to consider the progression of soft tissue healing and inflammation that can be heightened due to aggressive therapy to the operative hip in the immediate postoperative period.

Hypothesis:

It was hypothesized that introducing conservative physical therapy (PT) preoperatively along with a slow progression to return to activity using a structured, patient-guided postoperative program would improve patient outcomes.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

The authors conducted a retrospective review of patients who received a hip arthroscopy, were at least 18 years old, and who had completed the following patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 1-year follow-up: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, International Hip Outcome Tool-33, and Lower Extremity Functional Scale. Patients who underwent previous surgery on the ipsilateral hip and those with cartilage erosion down to exposed subchondral bone (Outerbridge grade 4) were excluded. Paired-samples t tests were used to compare the change in PRO scores at 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year follow-up, and the percentage of patients who achieved minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) thresholds on the mHHS were stratified according to their Outerbridge grade (0-3).

Results:

Overall, 202 patients (53% female, 47% male) were included in the analysis. Significant improvement was seen from 3 to 6 months on all PRO measures and from 6 months to 1 year on all but the mHHS (P < .05 for all except the mHHS). A significantly smaller percentage of patients with Outerbridge grade 3 cartilage damage achieved the MCID and SCB on the mHHS compared with those with grade 0, both at 6 months (grade 3 vs 0: 20% vs 63.2% [MCID]; 18.0% vs 52.6% [SCB]; both P = .03) and 1 year (grade 3 vs 0: 22.0% vs 57.9% [MCID]; 14.0% vs 52.6% [SCB]; both P < .05).

Conclusion:

A structured, patient-guided PT protocol after arthroscopic acetabular labral repair can significantly improve postoperative outcomes.

Hip Labral Reconstruction: Techniques and Outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With increased understanding of the biomechanical function of the acetabular labrum, more attention has been directed towards surgical techniques that preserve or restore normal joint anatomy. While labral repair has been shown to produce superior outcomes to labral debridement, repair is not always possible in the setting of severe labral intrasubstance tearing or deficiency. These patients were previously left without suitable arthroscopic treatment options.

RECENT FINDINGS

Labral reconstruction is an emerging procedure that has been shown to offer promising outcomes for traditionally difficult-to-treat hip pathology. Short- and mid-term follow-up studies have consistently demonstrated significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes, function, and patient satisfaction postoperatively, often despite less favorable preoperative characteristics. Labral reconstruction is a viable arthroscopic treatment option that has been shown to reliably produce clinically meaningful results in patients with severe labral pathology that is not amenable to repair/refixation or augmentation.

Prognostic Factors for Conversion to Arthroplasty after Hip Arthroscopy. Review of the Literature

Arthroscopic techniques in the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement have experienced an exponential increase over recent years for both diagnosis and treatment. The main risks with treatment are poor clinical outcomes and the conversion to prosthesis. Better knowledge and understanding of the various risk factors leading to prosthesis will improve patient selection for arthroscopic treatments rendering better results. The published papers that have been selected are related to series of hip arthroscopies with risk factors that lead to total hip arthroplasty (THA), in the PubMed database, without a time limit, number of patients, or follow-up time. We selected over 302 papers, 19 papers that show risk factors for conversion to THA. The main risk factors found were femoral chondropathy grade III/IV (relative risk 58.1-12 times increased), acetabular (20-2.96 times), an articular space <2 mm (39-4.26 times), age (14.6-1.06 times), Tönnis 2 in radiographic studies (7.73-3.1 times), obesity (5.6-2.3 times), and osteoarthritis (4.6-2.4 times). There are several risk factors which in an isolated way, highly increase the risk of THA. Some of them have a clear relationship (chondropathy, reduced joint space, Tönnis 2, and osteoarthritis). Based on the review we observed that the elements that are most associated with a conversion to THA after a hip arthroscopy are a high degree of femoral and acetabular chondropathy, a reduced joint space below 2 mm, older age, Tönnis 2, obesity, and hip osteoarthritis.

‘Mini-Max’ knotless acetabular labrum repair: repair construct rationale and allocation in a consecutive case series with minimum 1-year clinical outcomes

To describe the ‘mini-Max’ approach to labrum repair using non-absorbable 2.4-mm knotless suture anchors and report objective clinical outcomes with a large single-surgeon cohort. Level 3 retrospective case series. A retrospective review was conducted to report the use and allocation of non-absorbable 2.4-mm knotless suture anchors during ‘mini-Max’ labral repair from 2015 to 2018. Descriptive analysis of the labral damage severity, size and number of anchors used to arthroscopically repair the acetabular labrum was performed. Paired-samples t-tests were performed to evaluate whether preoperative and 1-year follow-up patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were statistically significant. An analysis of variance was performed comparing PROs with categorized number of labral anchors. A total of 390 patients were queried in this study, with 330 (85%) diagnosed intraoperatively with acetabular labral tears. A total of 245 patients (137 females and 108 males) with a mean age of 30.1 ± 11.6 years (mean ± SD) at the time of surgery underwent ‘mini-Max’ labral refixation. Of the 245 labral tears, 88 (35.9%) were graded as mild, 113 (46.1%) as moderate and 44 (18.0%) as severe. Labral repairs required an average of 2.1 ± 0.67 anchors across all patients included. Forty-one repairs (16.7%) required one anchor, 139 (56.7%) required two anchors, 63 (25.7%) required three anchors and 2 (0.8%) required four anchors. Significant improvements were reported for all PROs (P ≤ .001) at a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Arthroscopic ‘mini-Max’ labral repair using non-absorbable knotless suture anchors is a safe and effective technique for improving the lives of patients suffering from symptomatic acetabular labrum tears.

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.

Complications of hip preserving surgery

Preoperative evaluation of the pathomorphology is crucial for surgical planning, including radiographs as the basic modality and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and case-based additional imaging (e.g. 3D-CT, abduction views).

Hip arthroscopy (HAS) has undergone tremendous technical advances, an immense increase in use and the indications are getting wider. The most common indications for revision arthroscopy are labral tears and residual femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

Treatment of borderline developmental dysplastic hip is currently a subject of controversy. It is paramount to understand the underlining problem of the individual hip and distinguish instability (dysplasia) from FAI, as the appropriate treatment for unstable hips is periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) and for FAI arthroscopic impingement surgery.

PAO with a concomitant cam resection is associated with a higher survival rate compared to PAO alone for the treatment of hip dysplasia. Further, the challenge for the surgeon is the balance between over- and undercorrection.

Femoral torsion abnormalities should be evaluated and evaluation of femoral rotational osteotomy for these patients should be incorporated to the treatment plan.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:472-486. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210019

The Top 100 Most-Cited Articles on Arthroscopy: Most Popular Topic Is Rotator Cuff Rather Than Cartilage in the Last 5 Years

PURPOSE

To highlight the characteristics of the 100 most-cited articles on arthroscopy and provide the variation trend of citation rate among the top 25 articles in the past 9 years. We further analyzed the topics of interest in the past or currently.

METHODS

The Thomson ISI Web of Science database was used to identify arthroscopy-related articles that were published from 1950 to March 31, 2020. The 100 most-cited articles were selected for further analysis. In addition, author key words of the articles that published in the recent 5 years were further analyzed.

RESULTS

Mean of citations was 433.59 ± 400.73. The publication year ranged from 1980 to 2013. Most articles were focused on cartilage lesions and treatments (26%). A large proportion of articles were published in the 2000s (61%). Arthroscopy-the Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (23%) was the most popular journal. One half of the articles originated from the United States. The most prolific institution and first author were the Steadman Philippon Research Institute (5%) and Marc J. Philippon (4%), respectively. Most of the articles were Level IV evidence (33%). The citation rate increased by 131% from the previous top 25 articles published in 2011. A growth trend can be seen in the citation density over time. "Shoulder" (occurrences = 535) was the most used joint key word and "rotator cuff" (342) was the most used key word of research objective in the last 5 years, whereas "cartilage" only occurred 262 times.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on bibliometric analysis of the 100 most-cited articles on arthroscopy combined with network analysis of the whole articles that published in the recent 5 years, the topic of most interest in the recent 5 years was rotator cuff rather than cartilage. The number of citations among the 25 most-cited articles is growing rapidly and has at least doubled in size on average in the past 9 years. Citation density among the 100 most-cited articles on arthroscopy has seen a growth trend.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This article clarifies the characteristics of the 100 most-cited papers and provides guidance on the topics of interest in the past or currently as a roadmap for future research on arthroscopy.

Does Capsular Closure Affect Clinical Outcomes in Hip Arthroscopy? A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Background:

There is increasing concern of iatrogenic hip instability after capsulotomy during surgery. Greater emphasis is now being placed on capsular closure during surgery. There are no prospective studies that address whether capsular closure has any effect on outcomes.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient outcomes after interportal capsulotomy repair compared with no repair. We hypothesized that restoration of normal capsular anatomy with interportal repair will achieve clinical outcomes similar to those for no repair.

Study Design:

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods:

Adult patients with femoral acetabular impingement indicated for hip arthroscopy were randomized into either the capsular repair (CR) or the no repair (NR) groups. All patients underwent standard hip arthroscopy with labral repair with or without CAM/pincer lesion resection. Clinical outcomes were measured via the Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) subscale, Hip Outcome Score–Sport Specific (HOS-SS) subscale, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), visual analog scale for pain, International Hip Outcome Tool, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12).

Results:

A total of 54 patients (56 hips) were included (26 men and 30 women) with a mean age of 33 years. The HOS-ADL score significantly improved at 2 years in both the NR group (from 68.1 ± 20.5 to 88.6 ± 20.0; P < .001) and the CR group (from 59.2 ± 18.8 to 91.7 ± 12.3; P < .001). The HOS-SS score also significantly improved in both the NR group (from 41.1 ± 25.8 to 84.1 ± 21.9; P < .001) and the CR group (from 32.7 ± 23.7 to 77.7 ± 23.0; P < .001). Improvement was noted for all secondary outcome measures; however, there was no significant difference between the groups at any time point. Between 1 and 2 years, the NR group showed significant worsening on the HOS-ADL (–1.21 ± 5.09 vs 4.28 ± 7.91; P = .044), mHHS (1.08 ± 10.04 vs 10.12 ± 11.76; P = .042), and VR-12 Physical (–2.15 ± 5.52 vs 4.49 ± 7.30; P = .014) subsets compared with the CR group.

Conclusion:

There was significant improvement in the VR-12 Physical subscale at 2 years postoperatively in the capsular CR group compared with the NR group. Capsular closure appears to have no detrimental effect on functional outcome scores after hip arthroscopy. We recommend restoration of native anatomy if possible when performing hip arthroscopy.

Preoperative risk factors in hip arthroscopy

PURPOSE

Arthroscopic surgery is a usual technique to repair hip femoroacetabular impingement. Correlation exists among surgical indication, postoperative evolution, the final result, and the necessity of prosthesis in the near future. The assessment of specific parameters allowing us to evaluate the prognosis becomes vital to improve the results. The objective of this study is to check the variables found in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) treated with hip arthroscopy, and determine which of these variables would serve as key indicators in predicting the need for subsequent arthroplasty.

METHODS

Data from FAI surgical indications (age, weight, height, BMI, gender, side, radiographic Tönnis degree, cartilage lesion degree by Acetabular Labrum Articular Disruption (ALAD) degree, VAS value, HOS, mHHS and WOMAC) were collected from cases which should have had a minimum monitoring period of 2 years from 2007 to 2017. The results of the group which needed prosthesis were compared to the results of the ones who did not.

RESULTS

Among 452 patients who were monitored for an average of 5.8 years, 82 (18.1%) required conversion to prosthesis. The variables that indicated relatively high risk were fourth-degree acetabular labrum articular disruption (ALAD) chondral injury, preoperative radiographic Grade 2 Tönnis classification, age of over 55 years, WOMAC over 45 points, and HOS-ADL under 50 points. There were no significant differences between side, gender, VAS level, nor HOS.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of chondral injuries such as acetabular labrum articular disruption (ALAD) 4, radiographic Grade 2 Tönnis classification, higher age, higher BMI, and worse WOMAC, along with mHHS and HOS-ADL preoperative results, are factors which lead to a poor prognosis following FAI hip arthroscopic surgery, increasing the risk of prosthetic conversion in the short or medium term.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Increased range of motion but otherwise similar clinical outcome of arthroscopy over open osteoplasty for femoroacetabular impingement at midterm follow-up: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

A systematic review was conducted comparing patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs), functional scores, and the rate of complications between arthroscopic and open treatment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) at mid-term follow-up.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was performed in October 2020. All clinical trials treating FAI using open osteoplasty or arthroscopic surgery were considered for inclusion. Only articles reporting >12 months follow-up were included.

RESULTS

Data from 97 articles (9981 procedures) were collected. At a mean 19.2 months follow-up there was no difference between the two cohorts. At a mean follow-up of 38 months, the external rotation was increased in the arthroscopic group (P < 0.0001). The modified Harris Hip Score scored greater in favour of the open osteoplasty group (P = 0.04), as did the Hip Outcome Score - Activities of Daily Living subscale (P = 0.01). At a mean 45.1 months the arthroscopic group presented greater external rotation (P < 0.0001) and SF-12 Mental (P = 0.04). The modified Harris Hip Score was greater in favour of the open osteoplasty group (P = 0.03), as was the HOS-ADL (P = 0.01). Regarding complications, the arthroscopic group experienced lower rates of subsequent revisions (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Based on the significant reduction of revisions-rate and significant increase in range of motion, arthroscopy treatment for the management of FAI may be recommended.

Why Does Hip Arthroscopy Fail? Indications and PEARLS for Revision Success

The surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement has been shown to have successful early and mid-term clinical outcomes. Despite these favorable clinical outcomes that have been published in the literature, there is a subgroup of patients that present with continued or recurrent symptoms after surgical treatment. Not only has there been an increase in the number of hip arthroscopy procedures, but also there has been a corresponding increase in the number of revision hip arthroscopy and hip preservation surgeries. Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. However, chondral, labral, and capsular considerations also are important when addressing patients not only in the primary but also, the revision setting. In this review, we outline the evaluation and treatment of the patient that presents with continued hip and groin pain after undergoing a hip.

Mid- to Long-Term Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To assess mid- to long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of hip arthroscopy as well as the rates of secondary surgery and to identify indications for surgery and noted predictors of failure.

METHODS

A systematic review of the current literature was performed with the terms "hip arthroscopy," "outcomes," "patient-reported outcomes," "mid-term," "5-year," "long-term," and "10-year" in the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases in April of 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Data for study characteristics, patient demographics, follow-up time, indications for surgery, PROs, predictors of failure or unfavorable PROs, and rates of secondary hip preservation surgery and conversion to total hip arthroplasty were collected.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles were included. Four studies were level III and 9 were level IV. In total, 1571 hips were included, and the average follow-up time ranged from 60 to 240 months. The most common indications for hip arthroscopy were labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Twelve studies reported on PROs and all reported improvement at latest follow-up. The most reported on scores were the modified Harris Hip Score, Harris Hip Score, and the Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale. When grouped based on average follow-up time, the conversion rates at the 5- and 10-year time points ranged from 3.0% to 17.9% and 2.4% to 32.5%, respectively. One study with 20-year follow-up reported a conversion rate of 41.0%. Osteoarthritis and increased age were the most cited predictors for secondary surgery or decreased PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

At mid- to long-term follow-up, patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy demonstrated improvement in several PROs. There was great variability in rates for revision surgery and conversion to total hip arthroplasty. The most common indications for hip arthroscopy were labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Osteoarthritis and increased age were the most cited predictors for unfavorable outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Allocation of Anchors During Labral Repair: A Multicenter Cohort Analysis of Labral Treatment in Hip Arthroscopy

Background:

While previous studies have established several techniques for suture anchor repair of the acetabular labrum to bone during arthroscopic surgery, the current literature lacks evidence defining the appropriate number of suture anchors required to effectively restore the function of the labral tissue.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

To define the location and size of labral tears identified during hip arthroscopy for acetabular labral treatment in a large multicenter cohort. The secondary purpose was to differentiate the number of anchors used during arthroscopic labral repair. The hypothesis was that the location and size of the labral tear as well as the number of anchors identified would provide a range of fixation density per acetabular region and fixation method to be used as a guide in performing arthroscopic repair.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

We used a multicenter registry of prospectively collected hip arthroscopy cases to find patients who underwent arthroscopic labral repair by 1 of 7 orthopaedic surgeons between January 2015 and January 2017. The tear location and number of anchors used during repair were described using the clockface method, where 3 o’clock denoted the anterior extent of the tear and 9 o’clock the posterior extent, regardless of sidedness (left or right). Tear size was denoted as the number of “hours” spanned per clockface arc. Chi-square and univariate analyses of variance were performed to evaluate the data for both the entire group and among surgical centers.

Results:

A total of 1978 hips underwent arthroscopic treatment of the acetabular labrum; the most common tear size had a 3-hour span (n = 820; 41.5%). Of these hips, 1645 received labral repair, with most common repair location at the 12- to 3-o’clock position (n = 537; 32.6%). The surgeons varied in number of anchors per repair according to labral size (P < .001 for all), using 1 to 1.6 anchors for 1-hour tears, 1.7 to 2.4 anchors for 2-hour tears, 2.1 to 3.2 anchors for 3-hour tears, and 2.2 to 4.1 for 4-hour tears.

Conclusion:

Variation existed in the number of anchor implants per tear size. When labral repair involved a mean clockface arc >2 hours, at least 2 anchor points were fixated.

The Efficacy of Labral Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Background:

With a greater understanding of the importance of the acetabular labrum in the function of the hip, labral repair is preferred over debridement. However, in some scenarios, preservation or repair of the labrum is not possible, and labral reconstruction procedures have been growing in popularity as an alternative to labral resection.

Purpose:

To provide an up-to-date analysis of the literature to determine the overall efficacy of labral reconstruction when compared with labral repair or resection.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were searched for literature regarding labral reconstruction in the hip before July 21, 2020. The results were screened and evaluated by 2 reviewers, and a third reviewer resolved any discrepancies. The final studies were evaluated using the MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies) score.

Results:

There were 7 comparative studies that fit the inclusion criteria, with 228 hips from 197 patients. The mean follow-up was 34.6 months, and the mean age of all patients was 38.34 years. There were slightly more female patients than male patients (105 vs 92). Arthroscopic reconstruction was performed in 86% of studies (6/7); open surgical techniques, in 14% (1/7). A variety of grafts was used in the reconstructions. The indications for labral reconstruction and outcome measures varied in these publications. Nine patients were lost follow-up, and 6 patients converted to total hip replacement postlabral reconstruction. The assessment of these comparative studies illustrated statistically equivalent results between labral reconstruction and labral repair. Comparisons of labral reconstruction with labral resection also showed statistically equivalent postoperative patient-reported outcome scores; however, the rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty were significantly higher in the population undergoing resection.

Conclusion:

The review of current available comparative literature, which consists entirely of level 3 studies, suggests that labral reconstruction does improve postoperative outcomes but does not demonstrate superiority over repair. There may, however, be benefit to performing labral reconstruction over resection owing to the higher rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty in the labral resection group.

The Hip Suction Seal, Part II: The Effect of Rim Trimming, Chondrolabral Junction Separation, and Labral Repair/Refixation on Hip Distractive Stability

BACKGROUND

The acetabular labrum contains free nerve endings, and an unstable labrum can result in increased femoral head movement during hip motion. This can be caused by chondrolabral junction (CLJ) separation, especially in association with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement, and may contribute to hip pain.

HYPOTHESIS

Rim resection alone has no effect on suction seal biomechanics. Further, separation of the CLJ changes hip suction seal biomechanics when compared with those of the native state, whereas repair and refixation with suture anchors restore these biomechanical parameters.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

A total of 12 fresh-frozen human cadaveric hips were used in this study. Hips were mounted in a saline bath on a dynamic tensile testing machine and were distracted at a rate of 0.5 mm/s from neutral position. A total of 3 parameters (force, displacement, and intra-articular pressure) were measured throughout testing. Before testing, hips were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups: 1 that included the CLJ separation (CLJ Cut group) and 1 that did not (CLJ Intact group). Hips were tested in the following states: (1) native, (2) rim trimming, (3) separated CLJ (CLJ Cut group only), and (4) labral repair/refixation. For each group a linear mixed-effects model was used to compare biomechanical parameters between states.

RESULTS

Rim trimming did not affect any suction seal parameters relative to those of the native state. In the CLJ Cut group, no significant difference in distance to break the suction seal was observed for any states compared with that of the native state. In the CLJ Intact group, the distance to break the suction seal was significantly shorter in the labral refixation state (1.8 mm) than the native state (5.6 mm; P = .002). The maximum distraction force (62.1 ± 54.1 N) and the peak negative pressure (-36.6 ± 24.2 kPa) of the labral repair/refixation state were significantly lower than those of the native state in both groups (93.4 ± 41.7 N, P = .01; -60.7 ± 20.4 kPa, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Rim trimming did not change the biomechanical properties of the labral suction seal. Labral refixation resulted in a shorter distance to break the labral suction seal. This indicates that labral mobility is reduced by the labral refixation procedure, which could be beneficial in postoperative pain relief and labral healing.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The labral refixation reduced labral mobility, which could be beneficial for both pain relief and labral healing to the acetabulum after pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement resection.

Is Labral Size Predictive of Failure With Repair in Hip Arthroscopy?

PURPOSE

To assess whether labral size is predictive of labral repair failure or shows an association with patient outcomes after hip arthroscopy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent arthroscopic hip labral repair. Labral size was measured in 4 quadrants with an arthroscopic probe. The average size across torn labral segments was assessed for failure as determined by the change in patient-reported outcomes, the rate at which subjects achieved the minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state, and the need for additional surgery. Outcomes were evaluated for any continuous correlation as well as significant differences between the middle 50% of labral sizes and classes of labral sizes derived from upper and lower quartile and decile ranges. Included hips were those from patients aged between 18 and 55 years with 2-year postoperative follow-up and lateral center-edge angles between 25° and 40°.

RESULTS

The study included 571 hips. Labral width did not show a significant difference between hips requiring revision and those not requiring revision (P = .4054). No significant correlation was found between labral width and the change in the International Hip Outcome Tool 12 score (R² = 0.05780), modified Harris Hip Score (R² = 0.19826), or Nonarthritic Hip Score (R² = 0.23543) from preoperatively to 2 years postoperatively. Hips with labral sizes in the upper decile of our cohort showed significantly decreased improvement in the International Hip Outcome Tool 12 score (P = .0287) and Nonarthritic Hip Score (P = .0490) compared with the middle 50% of labral sizes. No statistically significant difference was found in the rate at which the groups achieved the minimal clinically important difference or patient acceptable symptomatic state.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertrophic labra in the largest 10th percentile showed lower postoperative outcome scores. However, no detectable clinical benefit was found in terms of patient-perceived clinical difference or acceptable symptomatic state. For most patients, labral size does not appear to significantly alter patient outcomes or the need for arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

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)

The Dancer's Hip: The Hyperflexible Athlete: Anatomy and Mean 3-Year Arthroscopic Clinical Outcomes

PURPOSE

To report preoperative anatomy, patient-related outcomes measures, and return to dance rates in a cohort of competitive dancers undergoing an arthroscopic hip procedure.

METHODS

Competitive dancers who underwent an arthroscopic hip procedure between 2008 and 2016 were included. Specific types of dance performed, morphology, and radiographic parameters were documented. Outcomes were evaluated with Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey, visual analog scale, and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (HOOS).

RESULTS

There were 63 competitive dancers (77 hips) with a mean age 21.2 years in the current study. Specific types of dance performed included 57 studio dance and 41 high-kick dance, and 28 dancers (44%) were professional-level. Morphology included cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (95%), pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (40%), anterior inferior iliac spine impingement (subspine) (83%), and mild (borderline) dysplasia (11%). Procedures performed included 95% labral repairs, 5% labral debridements, 99% femoral resections, 49% rim resections, 88% subspine decompressions, and 66% capsular plications. At mean 36 months' follow-up post-arthroscopy, the mean outcome improvements were 25.6 points (mHHS), 18.9 points (HOOS-activities of daily living), 29.9 points (HOOS-Sports), 8.7 points (12-Item Short Form Health Survey), and 3.7 points (visual analog scale) (P < .01 for each). Scores were significantly improved from preoperatively to most recent follow-up for mHHS (60.0 vs 85.6 points), HOOS-activities of daily living (72.5 vs 91.5 points), and HOOS-Sports (49.7 vs 79.6) (P < .01). Sixty-three percent of dancers returned to their previous level of competitive dance, 21% returned to limited or modified dance, and 16% were unable to return to dance, including 1 retirement.

CONCLUSIONS

A careful arthroscopic approach to address cam-type pathomorphology, highly prevalent subspine impingement, and capsular laxity in competitive dancers can achieve a modest rate of return to sport and good-to-excellent patient-reported outcomes at short- to mid-term (3-year) follow-up. Eighty-four percent of dancers ultimately returned to competitive dance, although only 63% returned to their preinjury competitive level.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, case series.

The Top 50 Most Influential Articles in Hip Arthroscopy

PURPOSE

To identify the 50 most frequently cited publications related to hip arthroscopy.

METHODS

The Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database was used to search for publications relating to hip arthroscopy. The top 50 most cited articles that met the inclusion criteria were recorded and reviewed for various metrics.

RESULTS

The top 50 publications were cited a total of 8,306 times, with an average of 437.2 total citations per year. Of the 50 articles identified, 44 had been published since 2000. Case series, expert opinion articles, and review articles were the most common study types.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of the most influential articles on hip arthroscopy are case series and expert opinions; however, as hip arthroscopy continues to become more widely performed, higher-level articles should supplant some of the articles included in this analysis. As indications for hip arthroscopy have expanded, so has its body of literature, with the vast majority of articles identified in our study having been published since 2000. Elucidating the 50 most cited articles in hip arthroscopy will allow practicing physicians a quick reference to the highest-yield articles and will allow residency programs to guide their education on the topic.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The top 50 list provides residents, fellows, and researchers with a comprehensive list of the major academic contributions to hip arthroscopy.

The impact of the 30 most cited articles on hip arthroscopy: what is the subject matter?

The purpose of this study was to identify the 30 most cited articles on hip arthroscopy and discuss their influence on recent surgical treatment. Due to advancements in hip arthroscopy, there is a widening spectrum of diagnostic and treatment indications. The purpose of this study was to identify the 30 most cited articles on hip arthroscopy and discuss their influence on contemporary surgical treatment. The Thomson Reuters Web of Science was used to identify the 30 most cited studies on hip arthroscopy between 1900 and 2018. These 30 articles generated 6152 citations with an average of 205.07 citations per item. Number of citations ranged from 146 to 461. Twenty-five out of the 30 papers were clinical cohort studies with a level of evidence between III and IV, encompassing 4348 patients. Four studies were reviewed (one including a technical note) and one a case report. We were able to identify the 30 most cited articles in the field of hip arthroscopy. Most articles were reported in high-impact journals, but reported small sample sizes in a retrospective setting. Prospective multi-arm cohort trials or randomized clinical trials represent opportunities for future studies.

Best Practice Guidelines for Hip Arthroscopy in Femoroacetabular Impingement: Results of a Delphi Process

BACKGROUND

Treatment algorithms for the arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome remain controversial because of a paucity of evidence-based guidance. Consequently, notable variability in clinical practice exists between different practitioners, necessitating expert consensus. The purpose of this study is to establish best practice guidelines (BPG) using formal techniques of consensus building among a group of experienced hip arthroscopists driven by the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. The scope of these guidelines includes preoperative recommendations, intraoperative practices, and postoperative protocols.

METHODS

The validated Delphi process and the nominal group technique (NGT), used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature, were used to formally derive consensus among 15 surgeons in North America. Participants were surveyed for current practices, presented with the results of a meta-analysis and systematic literature review, and asked to vote for or against the inclusion of nonleading, impartially phrased items during three iterative rounds while preserving the anonymity of participants' opinions. Agreement greater than 80% was considered consensus, and items near consensus (70% to 80% agreement) were further queried using the NGT in a moderated group session at the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine annual meeting.

RESULTS

Participants had a mean of 12.3 years of practice (range: 1 to 29 years) and performed an annual mean of 249 (range 100 to 500+) hip arthroscopies, with a combined total of approximately 52,580 procedures. Consensus was reached for the creation of BPG consisting of 27 preoperative recommendations, 15 intraoperative practices, and 10 postoperative protocols. The final checklist was supported by 100% of participants.

CONCLUSION

We developed the first national consensus-based BPG for the surgical and nonsurgical management of FAI. The resulting consensus items can serve as a tool to reduce the variability in preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative practices and guide further research for the arthroscopic management of FAI.

Defining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Athletes Undergoing Arthroscopic Correction of Sports-Related Femoroacetabular Impingement: The Percentage of Possible Improvement

BACKGROUND

Measures of clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes within orthopaedics are becoming a minimum requirement to establish the success of an intervention.

PURPOSE

To (1) define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 2 years postoperatively in competitive athletes undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for symptomatic, sports-related femoroacetabular impingement utilizing existing anchor- and distribution-based methods and (2) derive a measure of the MCID using the percentage of possible improvement (POPI) method and compare against existing techniques.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

There were 2 objective outcome measures-the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)-administered at baseline and 2 years postoperatively. External anchor questions were used to determine the MCID through mean change, mean difference, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) techniques. Distribution-based calculations consisted of 0.5 SD, effect size, and standard error of measurement techniques. The POPI was calculated alongside each technique as an achieved percentage change of maximum available improvement for each athlete relative to the individual baseline score. The impact of the preoperative baseline score on the MCID was assessed by assigning athletes to groups determined by baseline percentiles. Statistical analysis was performed, with P < .05 considered significant.

RESULTS

There were 576 athletes (96% male; mean age, 25.9 ± 5.7 years). The MCID score change (and POPI) for the mHHS and SF-36 ranged from 2.4 to 16.7 (21.6%-63.6%) and from 3.3 to 24.9 (22.1%-57.4%), respectively. The preoperative threshold value for achieving the ROC-determined MCID was 80.5 and 86.5 for the mHHS and 70.1 and 72.4 for the SF-36 for the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) score- and POPI-calculated MCID, respectively. Through the commonly used mean change method, 40.0% (mHHS) and 42.4% (SF-36) of athletes were unable to achieve the MCID because of high baseline scores and PROM ceiling effects compared with 0% when the POPI technique was used. A highly significant difference for the overall MCID was observed between preoperative baseline percentile groups for the mHHS (P = .014) and SF-36 (P = .004) (improvement in points), while there was no significant difference between groups for either the mHHS (P = .487) or SF-36 (P = .417) using the POPI technique.

CONCLUSION

The MCID defined by an absolute value of improvement was unable to account for postoperative progress in a large proportion of higher functioning athletes. The POPI technique negated associated ceiling effects, was unrestricted by the baseline score, and may be more appropriate in quantifying clinically important improvement.

Best practice guidelines for arthroscopic intervention in femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: results from an International Delphi Consensus Project-Phase 1

Arthroscopic procedures to treat hip pathologies such as femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome are now established in mainstream orthopaedic practice. Surgical techniques, rehabilitation protocols and outcomes are widely published. However, consensus on standards of practice remains to be determined. The International Hip Preservation Society (ISHA) has undertaken a research study to identify current areas of consensus across the global hip preservation community. The study focussed on consensus statements on the operative steps in the arthroscopic treatment of FAI syndrome. The study methodology was an online Delphi consensus method to collect aggregate opinions from hip preservation surgeons worldwide. Phase 1 of the planned three-phase study is presented here—focusing on consensus statements on the operative steps in the arthroscopic treatment of FAI syndrome. Ninety-nine statements achieved >80% consensus from a panel of 165 surgeons from six continents. This study is the first to evaluate global consensus on the arthroscopic treatment of FAI syndrome, as well as highlighting areas of contention and avenues for future research.

Labral Augmentation with Native Tissue Preservation with a 7.5-Year Follow-up: A Case Report

CASE

Arthroscopic labral repair has resulted in excellent functional outcomes. However, extensive labral damage or diminutive size of the labrum may preclude a repair. In these cases, labral augmentation serves as an operative treatment option. We report the case of a labral augmentation with 7.5 years of follow-up, including intraoperative reexamination, which highlights the ability of an iliotibial band autograft to incorporate with the native labrum.

CONCLUSION

When indicated in an appropriate patient, labral augmentation with an iliotibial band autograft is an established technique that can result in an excellent outcome.

[Arthroscopic-assisted mini-open technique for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement : Video article]

INTRODUCTION

Femoroacetabular impingement of the hip is considered a prearthrotic deformity, which should be treated at an early state to prevent complications.

MATERIAL

This video demonstrates the arthroscopic-assisted mini-open technique for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement of the hip. In the case presented a combined Pincer and Cam-deformity is treated with rim trimming, translabral labral refixation with two suture anchors and reconstruction of the head-neck junction.

CONCLUSION

The arthroscopic-assisted mini-open technique is a safe and reproducible procedure for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. It provides an alternative to hip arthroscopy and an additional treatment option in the portfolio of hip surgeons.

Management of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: current insights

Since the description of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) by Ganz in 2003, our understanding of the pathophysiology, management options, and outcomes has evolved and literature continues to be generated on this condition at a rapid rate. FAI has been identified as a primary source of hip pain as well as a generator of secondary osteoarthritis. Improvements in the radiographic detection of cam and pincer morphologies as well as a better understanding of the structural impact of these morphologies have led to improved preoperative planning. Advancements in hip arthroscopy techniques have also led to a higher rate of arthroscopic management of this condition over the initially described open surgical dislocation technique. While arthroscopic management of this condition has become the most common form of surgical management for FAI, inadequate bony resection has been shown to be a frequent source of revision surgery. Therefore, roles for open surgical dislocation and combined mini-open approaches remain, particularly in cases where concern for the inability to fully access the morphology arthroscopically exists.

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.

Minimum 5-Year Outcomes of Arthroscopic Hip Labral Reconstruction With Nested Matched-Pair Benchmarking Against a Labral Repair Control Group

BACKGROUND

Labral reconstruction has demonstrated short-term benefit for the treatment of irreparable labral tears. Nonetheless, there is a scarcity of evidence for midterm outcomes of this treatment.

HYPOTHESES

Arthroscopic segmental reconstruction in the setting of irreparable labral tears would show improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and high patient satisfaction at minimum 5-year follow-up. Second, primary labral reconstruction (PLRECON) would result in similar improvement in PROs at minimum 5-year follow-up when compared with a matched-pair primary labral repair (PLREPAIR) control group.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Data from February 2008 to April 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they underwent hip arthroscopy for segmental labral reconstruction in the setting of irreparable labral tear and femoroacetabular impingement, with minimum 5-year follow-up for modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale, patient satisfaction, and visual analog scale for pain. Exclusion criteria were Tönnis osteoarthritis grade >1, prior hip conditions, or workers' compensation claims. PLRECON cases were matched in a 1:3 ratio to a PLREPAIR control group based on age ±5 years, sex, and body mass index ±5 kg/m².

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were eligible for the study, of which 23 (82.14%) had minimum 5-year follow-up. The authors found significant improvement from preoperative to latest follow-up in all outcome measures recorded: 17.8-point increase in modified Harris Hip Score (P = .002), 22-point increase in Nonarthritic Hip Score (P < .001), 25.4-point increase in Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (P = .003), and a 2.9-point decrease in visual analog scale pain ratings (P < .001). Mean patient satisfaction was 7.1 out of 10. In the nested matched-pair analysis, 17 patients who underwent PLRECON were matched to a control group of 51 patients who underwent PLREPAIR. PLRECON demonstrated comparable survivorship and comparable improvements in all PROs with the exception of patient satisfaction (6.7 vs 8.5, P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Hip arthroscopy with segmental labral reconstruction resulted in significant improvement in PROs at minimum 5-year follow-up. PLRECON reached comparable functional outcomes when compared with a benchmark PLREPAIR control group but demonstrated lower patient satisfaction at latest follow-up.

Editorial Commentary: Errors of Omission Versus Errors of Commission: The Case of Hip Labral Reconstruction

As hip arthroscopy grows at an increasingly rapid pace, hip surgeons are faced with significant challenges in addressing various pathologies, such as irreparable hip labral tears. As technology and skill sets evolve, the ability to perform hip labral reconstruction in the setting of irreparable labral tears becomes not a matter of "Can we" but rather "Should we" be doing these. Basic science studies have demonstrated the vital role of the hip labrum for normal hip functioning and chondral health. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated that hip reconstruction can restore much of the function of the native labrum when the labrum is removed. Systematic review of the composite literature of hip labral reconstruction in the setting of irreparable labral repairs demonstrates good improvements in pain and validated patient-reported outcomes in the short term with minimal follow-up of 1 year. The long-term benefits and ability to prevent or delay degenerative changes to the hip with labral reconstruction remain unknown.

Arthroscopic Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement in Skeletally Immature Athletes: Radiographic and Clinical Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate radiographic and clinical outcomes after arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) correction in symptomatic adolescent athletes with open physes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed radiographic and clinical outcomes in patients treated with a non-physeal-sparing arthroscopic approach for symptomatic FAI with open physes and a minimum 1-year follow-up. Specific plain radiographic and computed tomography parameters were determined, and preoperative and postoperative outcomes were prospectively evaluated with modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-Item Veterans-Rand, and pain on a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven hips (28 patients; 75% male) with a mean age of 15.9 years (range, 12.8-18.3 years) had imaging studies consistent with open femoral neck and iliac crest physes. The ischial tuberosity and greater trochanteric physes were open in 95% and 54% of the hips, respectively. All patients participated in organized athletics, and 50% were in multiple sports year-round. Mean follow-up was 39.8 months post-arthroscopic FAI correction. There was a mean 27.7-point improvement in the mHHS (P < .001), a 4.8-point decrease in the visual analog scale for pain (P < .001), and a 15.2-point improvement in the 12-Item Veterans-Rand physical component (P < .001). Ninety-three percent of patients returned to their preinjury level of sports participation without limitations. Thirty (81.1%) patients demonstrated improvements in mHHS greater than the minimally clinically important difference (of mHHS 8 points). Two patients could not reach minimally clinically important difference because of a preoperative mHHS of > 92. There were no postoperative physeal growth arrests, growth disturbances, physeal instability, or avascular necrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

A non-physeal-sparing arthroscopic approach for FAI in adolescents with open physes is safe and effective with no evidence of clinically relevant complication of growth arrest-related deformity or physeal instability in patients with a minimum of 1 year (mean, 39.8 months) of follow-up after surgery. Young, highly athletic adolescent patients with larger FAI deformities demonstrated greater outcomes improvement after arthroscopy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

The Extension-Thickness-Damage (ETD) score: a pre-operative hip MR arthrography-based classification to predict type of labrum surgery

INTRODUCTION

Hip magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) is the pre-operative imaging modality of choice in patients with labral damage, with several classifications of labral tears having been reported based on MRA findings. Nevertheless, none of the available classification systems allows the surgeon to predict before surgery how a labral tear could be treated. Our purpose was to develop a new MRA-based scoring system of labral tears to predict before surgery the treatment option more suitable for labral tears.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-seven patients (29 males and 18 females; mean age: 35.9 ± 12.4) performed hip MRA for suspicious of femoroacetabular impingement and were afterwards subjected to arthroscopic treatment. Two musculoskeletal radiologists reviewed all pre-operative examinations and provided the Extension-Thickness-Damage score for each patient, based on Extension of tear, Thickness of labrum, and type of Damage. Chondral lesions grading was based on the arthroscopic findings according to Konan classification. For statistical purposes, patients were divided into two groups, depending on the type of treatment: labral repair or debridement. Mann-Whitney U, Chi-square, receiver operator curves, and Cohen kappa statistics were used.

RESULTS

35/47 underwent repair, while 12/47 were debrided. In both groups, the median chondral damage was grade III, with no significant differences (p = 0.439). The median Extension-Thickness-Damage score in the repair group (6) was significantly lower (p < 0.001) than that in the debridement group (8). The highest diagnostic performance (area under the curve) of Extension-Thickness-Damage was 0.819. The inter-observer agreement was substantial in the evaluation of Extension (k = 0.626) and Thickness (k = 0.771), and almost perfect for Damage (k = 0.827). Higher scores of Extension and Thickness were more frequently associated with debridement (p < 0.001; p = 0.0016, respectively), with no significant differences on the basis of Damage parameter (p = 0.284).

CONCLUSIONS

The MRA-based Extension-Thickness-Damage score could represent a helpful pre-operative tool, expressing the extent of the damage and its reparability before arthroscopy.

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.

The Hip Labrum Reconstruction: Indications and Outcomes-an Updated Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To present an updated systematic review of the indications and outcomes of open and arthroscopic labral reconstruction. Due to the increasing popularity and recognition, the arthroscopic procedure has gained in recent years, the aim was to assess for changes in indications, graft selection, and improvement in outcomes within the last 5 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of nine eligible studies (six case series, one cohort, and two retrospective comparative studies) with a total of 234 patients (265 hips), and an average 12/16 (non-comparative studies) and 20/24 (comparative studies) quality on the MINORS score were included in this review. All patients underwent labral reconstruction, whether as primary surgery or revision (76% vs 24% respectively). There were 244 hips assessed at final follow- up (92%) with a reported mean range of 12 and 61 months. There were more graft variabilities found in this study compared with the previous review (iliotibial band allograft, gracilis tendon autograft, indirect head of rectus femoris autograft, semitendinosus allograft, peroneus brevis allograft, labrum allograft, ligamentum capitus femoris). Surgical approaches differed (open 7.9% (previously 18.7%), arthroscopic 86% (previously 81. 3 %), arthroscopic assisted mini-open technique (AAMOT) (6%)). Overall, improvement was observed in the patient-reported outcomes and functional scores, with variability in their statistical significance. The failure rate or conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) decreased compared with the previous review (20% vs 9.5% [conversion to THA was 5.7% and revision surgery rate was 3. 8%]). Indications for labrum reconstruction remained similar (i.e., young, active patients with no or minimal arthritis (Tonnis 0-1), irreparable or ossified labrum, and hypotrophic < 2 mm or dysfunctional hypertrophic labrum > 8 mm). According to recent evidence, hip labrum reconstruction is a new technique that showed short- and mid-term improvement in patient-reported outcomes and functional scores postoperatively. The primary indication for reconstruction remained similar over time. The failure rates and/or conversion to THA appear to have decreased over time. Long-term follow-up with higher quality studies was not available in the literature based on this review. Level of evidence 2.

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.