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

Relationships among hip instability, iliofemoral ligament, and pain in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the relationships among hip instability, pain, and morphology of the iliofemoral ligament (ILFL) in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) using ultrasonography (US).

METHODS

We reviewed 86 patients (109 hips) with DDH (Group D), 40 patients (46 hips) with borderline hip dysplasia (BDDH) (Group B) and 20 patients (23 hips) without hip pain and bony abnormality (control group). Group D was classified into three subgroups-the severe (group SP), moderate (group MP), and none/mild (group NMP) hip pain groups-using the visual analogue scale (VAS). For evaluating hip instability and ILFL morphology, the distance between the anterior edge of the anterior inferior iliac spine (AIIS) and the horizontal line to the femoral head, and ILFL thickness were measured using US. The difference between the distance in the neutral position and Patrick position was calculated and defined as the femoral head translation distance (FTD).

RESULTS

FTD and ILFL thickness in group D were significantly larger than those in the control group and group B (P < 0.05). There was a significant positive correlation between FTD and ILFL thickness in three groups (r = 0.57, P < 0.05; r = 0.55, P < 0.05; r = 0.62, P < 0.05, respectively). FTD and ILFL thickness in group SP were significantly larger than those in group NMP (P < 0.05). FTD and ILFL thickness in group D had significantly negative correlations with the lateral center edge (r = -0.54, P < 0.05; r = -0.40, P < 0.05, respectively) and vertical-center-anterior angle (r = -0.51, P < 0.05; r = -0.43, P < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Acetabular bony deficiency, especially in the anterior and lateral region can result in antero-posterior hip instability, leading to thickened ILFL and hip pain, even in patients with BDDH. These findings may facilitate our understanding and treatment of patients with DDH. When hip instability is suspected, hip US examination may help confirm the diagnosis and assist in providing objective clinical diagnostic evidence.

Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopy With Labral Preservation or Reconstruction Plus Capsular Closure Shows Excellent Outcome in Patients With Borderline Hip Dysplasia and is Less Invasive Than Periacetabular Osteotomy

Borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH), or borderline hip dysplasia (BHD), traditionally characterized by a relatively low lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), presents a complex challenge in treatment due to its multifaceted etiology involving instability, femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), or a combination thereof. The optimal approach to managing adult BDDH remains a subject of significant debate. Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is considered the preferred treatment for addressing severe acetabular under-coverage, as it rectifies the underlying bony deficiency and promotes stability. However, the treatment of BDDH is less straightforward, particularly with the advancement of hip arthroscopy techniques, specifically labral preservation and capsular management. Given the minimally invasive and rapid postoperative rehabilitation advantage for arthroscopic procedures over open surgeries, numerous attempts have been undertaken in this context. Research has revealed favorable patient-reported outcomes (PROs), low failure rates, and a significant proportion of returning to sports (RTS) after arthroscopic management for patients with BDDH. Although we might in the right direction, Level I evidence studies are needed to comprehensively compare long-term PROs, failure rates, and rates of RTS between arthroscopy and PAO in the treatment of BDDH.

When are patients with osteoarthritis referred for surgery?

Current treatment strategies in hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) involve a combined approach that includes not only modification of risk factors and conservative treatment but also joint-preserving surgical therapy in the early stages, or joint replacement in late OA. With the recent development of new etiological concepts (i.e. hip dysplasia and femoroacetabular impingement as major risk factors for hip OA), treatment alternatives for joint preservation could be extended significantly. Satisfactory results of osteotomies and other reconstructive procedures around hip and knee joints can only be expected in early OA (Kellgren/Lawrence grade 0-II). If patients with advanced radiographic OA grades III-IV do not respond to conservative treatment over at least 3 months and express a relevant burden of disease, joint replacement might be considered. Prior to surgery, potential contraindications must be excluded, patient expectations need to be discussed, and modifiable risk factors, which may negatively influence the outcome, should be optimized.

External Validation of the FEAR Index in Borderline Acetabular Dysplasia

Background

Given the lack of established, externally validated criteria for the diagnosis of unstable hips, the Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof (FEAR) index has been proposed as a useful tool for identifying hips with instability in the setting of borderline acetabular dysplasia.

Purposes

To (1) determine the external performance of the FEAR index in identifying hips with a clinical diagnosis of instability in the setting of borderline dysplasia and (2) assess the performance of the FEAR index compared with acetabular inclination or physeal scar angle alone.

Study Design

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

The authors reviewed 176 patients with borderline acetabular dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle, 20°-25°). A positive FEAR index was defined as ≥5°. An alternative threshold ≥2° was also assessed. Significant instability was determined by the senior surgeon based on the combination of patient and radiographic features; unstable hips were treated with periacetabular osteotomy (with or without hip arthroscopy), and stable hips were treated with isolated hip arthroscopy.

Results

Only 18% of borderline hips had a positive FEAR index. The ≥5° positive FEAR index threshold had a sensitivity of 33% (23/70) and specificity of 92% (98/106) in predicting the clinical diagnosis of instability. The ≥2° FEAR index threshold had a sensitivity of 39% (27/70) and specificity of 89% (94/106) in predicting the clinical diagnosis of instability. No alternative threshold for the FEAR index resulted in high levels of sensitivity and specificity. A threshold of -5° was required to reach an adequate sensitivity of 74%. The FEAR index remained a significant predictor of hip instability even after controlling for acetabular inclination (odds ratio, 1.12; P < .001) or physeal scar angle (odds ratio, 1.6; P < .001).

Conclusion

In the current study, a positive FEAR index was generally indicative of the presence of clinical instability, but the FEAR index alone remained inadequate to fully define the instability of a given hip, as it demonstrated low sensitivity (only 33%) in the external validation. The FEAR index is best used in the context of other clinical and radiographic features.

Predictive radiological parameters of failure following surgical management of femoroacetabular impingement associated with borderline acetabular dysplasia

INTRODUCTION

The role of arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in mild or borderline hip dysplasia (lateral center edge angle=18-25) is controversial. It is recommended to combine capsular plication with femoral neck osteoplasty and suture repair of the labrum. Few studies have investigated which radiological parameters are associated with failure of this procedure.

HYPOTHESIS

A larger number of radiological signs of mild or borderline hip dysplasia than radiological signs of FAI negatively influence the outcomes of arthroscopic treatment.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study done with data collected prospectively after a minimum of 2 years' follow-up in patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment of FAI due to cam impingement combined with mild to moderate hip dysplasia. Patients with hip osteoarthritis graded as ≥ Tönnis 2 were excluded. Functional outcome scores (mHHS and NAHS) were determined along with the need for reoperation. Three groups were defined based on the outcomes: success (mHHS ≥ Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State [PASS]); moderate improvement (improvement in mHHS + mHHS<PASS) and failure (worsening of the mHHS). Demographic data, radiographic parameters (LCEA, Tönnis angle, alpha angle, offset, FEAR index, Shenton's line, Cliff sign, anterior wall index [AWI], posterior wall index [PWI]) and intraoperative findings were compared between these three groups. The area under the curve (AUC) for the most relevant data identified during the univariate analysis were then modeled to define which factors were the best at predicting failed arthroscopic treatment a posteriori.

RESULTS

The study analyzed 39 patients. The mean mHHS was 76±15 [40-92]. The "success" group consisted of 21 patients (56%, 21/39), the "moderate improvement" group of 12 patients (31%, 12/39) and the failure group of 6 patients (13%, 6/39) (2 subsequently underwent total hip replacement, 4 underwent shelf acetabuloplasty). The FEAR index was significantly higher and the AWI and VCE were significantly lower in the "failure" group. The FEAR index was the best predictive factor; an index ≥ 4° detected 100% of failures with 96% specificity. The patients in the "moderate improvement" group were significantly older (37 years±8 [18-45]<p= 0.04) with a significantly higher offset (2mm±3 [-5-5]<p=0.004); an offset ≥ 2mm could detect 73% of them with a specificity of 72%.

CONCLUSION

A FEAR index ≥ 4° and offset ≥ 2mm is best able to detect patients at risk of failure and unsatisfactory results, respectively, in the mild clinical cam-type impingement in a population of FAI patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective series.

Patients With a High Femoroepiphyseal Roof With Concomitant Borderline Hip Dysplasia and Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Do Not Demonstrate Inferior Outcomes Following Arthroscopic Hip Surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients with borderline hip dysplasia and hip instability defined radiographically using the femoroepiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index and in patients without radiographic evidence of hip instability.

METHODS

Data from consecutive patients with borderline hip dysplasia (lateral center edge angle between 18˚-25˚) who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between April 2012 and June 2017 for the treatment of FAIS were analyzed. Baseline demographic data, radiographic parameters, preoperative, and 2-year postoperative patient-reported outcome measures were collected. The FEAR index was measured by 3 different observers. Patients with an average FEAR index ≥2˚ were categorized as having radiographic evidence of instability as previously published. The analysis was powered to detect a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for each outcome score. Statistical analysis was performed as appropriate to compare patients with FEAR index ≥2 and <2°.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients met the inclusion criteria. The average age and body mass index of included patients was 31.7 ± 13.2 (P < .325) years and 25.1 ± 5.6 kg/m² (P < .862). There were no statistically significant demographic differences between the groups. Nineteen (13.0%) patients were found to have a FEAR index of over 2˚. The FEAR index <2° and FEAR index ≥2° groups had a mean preoperative FEAR index (standard deviation, range) of -7.0 (5.2, -26.8 to 1.9) and 4.8 (2.5, 2.0-11.8), respectively. The interrater intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.96. Postoperative patient-reported outcomes and rates of MCID and patient-acceptable symptomatic state achievement were not statistically different between the radiographically stable and unstable groups. (p>0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

Patients with borderline hip dysplasia and radiographic evidence of hip instability, as measured by the FEAR index (≥2°), achieve similar improvement in 2-year outcomes compared to those with radiographically stable hips after arthroscopic treatment of FAIS.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Retrospective Level III cohort study.

Editorial Commentary: Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement in Patients With Borderline Dysplasia Does Not Result in Inferior Outcomes Compared With Outcomes in Patients Without Dysplasia: Do Not Fear

The treatment of adult borderline hip dysplasia remains challenging and continues to be a subject of controversy. The preferred treatment for hip instability and acetabular undercoverage is periacetabular osteotomy. However, patients with painful hips and associated femoroacetebular impingement, microinstability, or no instability may benefit from arthroscopic surgery. Short-term studies have reported favorable clinical outcomes. Traditionally, the lateral center-edge angle was used to determine hip dysplasia. More recently the femoro-epiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index was introduced as a measure for borderline dysplasia. In general, a FEAR index of less than 5° indicates hip instability. When using a FEAR index of more than 2° as a cut-off for hip instability and borderline dysplasia, arthroscopic hip surgery can achieve very similar clinical outcomes to patients with a FEAR index of less than 2°. However low and unequal sample sizes have potentially resulted in both type I and II errors, reducing internal study validity. Although this may be a step in the right direction, further high-quality studies are required to understand patients' characteristics on diagnosis, prognosis, outcomes of surgical interventions, and long-term disease progression for adult borderline hip dysplasia.

Central acetabular osteophytes (CAO) are more prevalent in the borderline developmental dysplastic hip (BDDH) patients: a propensity-score matched CT study

Background

The acetabular fossa often showing the first signs of degeneration, Central acetabular osteophytes (CAO) have been increasingly recognized during hip arthroscopy. The purpose of this study was to investigate the condition of CAO in BDDH hips and compare cotyloid fossa size between the BDDH and the non-BDDH hips on CT images.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of hip CT images of FAI or labral injury patients. A 1:2 propensity-score matched observational study comparing the linear length of cotyloid fossa was analyzed. Cotyloid fossa width (CFW) and cotyloid notch width (CNW) were measured on axial images, cotyloid fossa height (CFH) and cotyloid fossa depth (CFD) were measured on coronal images. Within the CAO patients, we performed central acetabular decompression (CAD) and then observed the morphology change in fossa.

Results

Propensity-score matching yielded 61 BDDH hips and 122 non-BDDH hips. BDDH hips had a higher prevalence of CAO and a decreased linear length of cotyloid fossa (CFW, CFH and CNW). In the BDDH group, 33 hips underwent CAD, postoperative CFW, CFH and CNW were significantly increased (p < .001 for all), and had no statistical difference compared with the non-BDDH hips (p = .193, p = .132, p = .421, respectively).

Conclusion

BDDH hips had a significantly higher prevalence of CAO than adequate acetabular coverage hips. After the procedure of CAD, BDDH hips were found to have acetabular parameters (CFW, CFH, CNW) and were restored to that of the control hips.

Editorial Commentary: Hip Dysplasia-Arthroscopic Femoroacetabular Impingement Versus Periacetabular Osteotomy: Do Not FEAR the Size of the Next Step

Hip dysplasia is characterized by inadequate acetabular coverage of the femoral head. There is a consensus that hip dysplasia with a lateral center edge angle (LCEA) less than18° should be treated with realignment of acetabular coverage by acetabular osteotomy, but there is controversy whether milder, borderline dysplasia with an LCEA between 18° and 25° should be treated with arthroscopy or acetabular reorientation. Identifying whether the problem is related to dysplasia or femoroacetabular impingement syndrome is essential, and a crucial factor is whether the hip is unstable. A femoroepiphyseal acetabular roof (FEAR) index with a cutoff value of 2 predicts hip stability with 90% probability, even with a normative LCEA. In addition, according to the anterior-wall index (AWI), the anterior acetabular border should cross onto the middle third of the medial femoral head radius on a line that runs parallel to the femoral neck axis through the center of the femoral head. A reduced AWI suggests a deficient anterior rim. Next, lateral labrum length correlates with the FEAR index and anterior labrum length with AWI, i.e., anterior dysplasia. Consequently, the lateral labrum increases in size with progressive instability, and the anterior labrum increases in size with decreased anterior coverage. Threshold values for labrum size should be defined to guide clinical decision making. Ultimately, we require an algorithm to guide arthroscopy versus bony correction.

Periacetabular osteotomy for acetabular retroversion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The evidence for periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) when used in the management of acetabular retroversion remain limited. The review aims to answer the following questions: (1) What are the indications for an anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion? (2) When are other concomitant procedures required when performing anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion? (3) To what extent is an anteverting PAO able to correct acetabular retroversion? (4) What are the clinical outcomes for an anteverting PAO when used in acetabular retroversion? (5) What is the estimated survival for anteverting PAO when used in the treatment of acetabular retroversion, before other procedures need to be performed? (6) What are the complications and the complication rates when an anteverting PAO is performed? (7) How do the outcomes of an anteverting PAO compare to other surgical procedures used in the management of acetabular retroversion?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The systematic review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. The search was conducted using PubMed Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from inception through 1 May 2020. The keywords used were "periacetabular osteotomy". All studies that reported the outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy for acetabular retroversion were included. Each study's data was then retrieved individually. The study design, surgical technique, indications, outcomes and complications of each study were analysed.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 225 hips were included. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for a positive crossover sign and posterior wall sign preoperatively as compared to postoperatively were 456.31 (95% CI: 99.57 to 2091.28) and 53.45 (95% CI: 23.05 to 123.93) respectively. The pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) for studies with their mean preoperative LCEA and AI in the dysplastic range were 12.61 (95% CI: 6.54 to 18.68) and-15.0 (95% CI: -19.40 to -11.80) respectively, while the pooled WMD for studies with their mean preoperative LCEA and AI in the normal range were 3.43 (95% CI: 1.08 to 5.77) and -3.56 (95% CI: -5.29 to -1.83) respectively. Other indicators for acetabular retroversion correction, hip dysplasia correction, functional outcomes and range of motion were also significantly improved and sustained up till 11 years postoperatively. Only 7.1% of the hips required subsequent surgical procedures for impingement symptoms or progression of osteoarthritis, and the mean estimate for survival time across the studies was 123.90 months (95% CI: 119.94 to 127.86). The complication rates for low-grade complication were 31.6% while the rate for high-grade complications was 12.0%.

DISCUSSION

Anteverting PAO is indicated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion, and when performed, leads to good deformity correction for both acetabular retroversion and hip dysplasia, positive improvement in clinical outcomes sustainable till 11 years postoperatively and a mean estimated survival time of more than 10 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Prevalence of femoro-acetabular impingement in non-arthritic patients with hip pain: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

As the prevalence of femoro-acetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in symptomatic patients who lack evidence of hip osteoarthritis (OA) remains to be described, the purpose of this study was to calculate the prevalence of FAIS in this patient population.

METHODS

Libraries of PubMed, Embase, and Ovid were systematically reviewed for all studies between 2009 and 2019, investigating femoro-acetabular impingement and hip pain. Level I-IV studies delineating patients with hip pain who do not have OA (Tonnis or Outerbridge grades < three) were included. Demographics, outcomes, radiographic parameters, and criteria were entered into a meta-analysis to calculate the incidence of FAIS in non-arthritic symptomatic hips.

RESULTS

In total, 2264 patients (2758 hips) were included in the pooled analysis. Weighted mean age was 31 years. The incidence of FAIS in patients with no evidence of osteoarthritis but who complain of hip pain is 61% (47.3-74.4%). In total, 1483 hips were diagnosed with FAIS. Of the studies that described the rates of all three of the various subtypes of FAIS in their reports, 37% had a combined-type, 38% had a cam-type, and 25% had a pincer-type FAIS.

CONCLUSION

Femoroacetabular impingement should be suspected in 47 to 74% of patients with hip pain and without arthritis. Physicians must maintain a high index of suspicion for FAIS in young patients presenting with hip pain, as FAIS is a common and treatable condition that, if left alone, may lead to hip degeneration.

Editorial Commentary: At the Intersection of Borderline Dysplasia and Femoroacetabular Impingement-Which Way Should We Turn?

Borderline acetabular dysplasia remains a controversial topic in hip preservation, with poor current comparative literature to guide accurate diagnosis and treatment decision making. Borderline dysplasia represents a "transitional acetabular coverage" pattern between more classic acetabular dysplasia and normal coverage. Traditionally, borderline dysplasia has been defined by a lateral center-edge angle between 20° and 25°, whereas more recently, some authors have used 18° to 25°. Treatment decisions between isolated hip arthroscopy (addressing labral tears, femoroacetabular impingement morphology, and capsular laxity) and periacetabular osteotomy (improving joint stability, often combined with arthroscopy) remain challenging because the fundamental mechanical diagnosis (instability vs femoroacetabular impingement) can be difficult to determine clinically. Obtaining an accurate diagnosis to direct surgical treatment relies on comprehensive assessment of additional bony anatomy features (including femoral version) and patient characteristics (including sex, soft-tissue laxity, and range of motion). Future research efforts in borderline dysplasia should better characterize the role of disease- and patient-specific factors that will inform accurate diagnoses, leading to the development of optimal treatment strategies in distinct patient subgroups through comparison of treatment outcomes.