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

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.

Labral repair, reconstruction, and augmentation improve postoperative outcomes in patients with irreparable or hypoplastic labra: A systematic review

PURPOSE

To review the postoperative outcomes of arthroscopic surgical options in treating irreparable and hypoplastic labrum of the hip.

METHODS

Three online databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE) were searched from database inception to June 27, 2023 to identify literature on treatment strategies for hypoplastic/irreparable acetabular labrum. Data pertaining to classification of irreparable tears or labral hypoplasia, indication for surgery, description of treatment, radiographic findings, and clinical outcomes were recorded and described. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed by the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria.

RESULTS

Seven level IV case series, eleven level III retrospective cohort studies, and two level II prospective cohort studies comprising 1937 patients were included for analysis. Studies were divided into an irreparable labral group comprising 1002 patients and a hypoplastic labral group comprising 935 patients. Treatments included repair, augmentation, or reconstruction. In the irreparable group, 12 studies recorded improvement of modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) with preoperative scores ranging from 50.3 to 67.3 and postoperative scores ranging from 76.2 to 95.0. The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) and rate of revision arthroscopy were 6.6% and 5.9%, respectively across all studies. In the hypoplastic group, two studies that focused on repair noted no statistical difference in mHHS for repair in hypoplastic labrum vs repair in non-hypoplastic labrum. One study showed that there was a difference in post-operative mHHS for labral repair for hypoplastic vs non-hypoplastic labrum, with repair in non-hypoplastic labrum showing superior mHHS (p ​< ​0.001).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this review suggest that treatment of irreparable labra with reconstruction or augmentation results in improved patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). For the hypoplastic labrum, primary repair also results in improvement in PROMs. Future studies focusing on the hypoplastic labra alone with an appropriate control group, rather than irreparable labral tears, are needed to properly assess patient outcomes and guide surgical indications.

Editorial Commentary: Small Labral Size on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Is an Indication for Labral Reconstruction in the Setting of Revision Hip Arthroscopy

Revision hip arthroscopy is an increasingly common procedure as rates of primary hip arthroscopy rise. Etiologies for symptom recurrence may include residual femoroacetabular impingement, cam over-resection, labral pathology, chondral wear, adhesions, and instability. This has spawned sophisticated surgical techniques in hip arthroscopy including labral reconstruction. Indications for labral reconstruction in the revision setting obviously include labral deficiency. In addition, in the absence of other obvious reasons for failure of the primary procedure, a labral reconstruction should be considered for diminutive labra. The ability to predict labral size before surgery based on magnetic resonance imaging can be invaluable.

Acetabular Labral Repair and Selective Labral Debridement Show No Significant Difference in Clinical Outcomes at a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of arthroscopic labral repair using looped type suture with a matched-pair selective labral debridement with a minimum 2-years follow-up.

METHODS

We identified 378 patients undergoing primary arthroscopic labral repair using loop-suture and selective labral debridement from January 2, 2018, to December 28, 2020. The labral repair group was matched 1:1 to a selective labral debridement control group by age, sex, body mass index, follow-up period, lateral center-edge angle, Tönnis grade, and preoperative joint space. Before surgery, 3-Tesla radial magnetic resonance imaging with a 3-dimensional double-echo steady-state sequence was obtained following failed nonoperative treatment lasting more than 3 months. Follow-up imaging was conducted at a minimum of 2 years. In both groups, the ratio of positive slices in which a disrupted chondrolabral junction was observed between the 2 o'clock and 11 o'clock positions was measured. Patient-reported outcome scores included the Harris Hip Score, visual analog score, Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living Subscale, and Hip Outcome Score of Sport-Specific Subscale.

RESULTS

In total, 76 patients of the repair group were matched to 76 controls with a minimum 2-years follow-up (repair vs control: 2.6 ± 0.4 vs 2.6 ± 0.4 years, P = .775). The repair group experienced a 2-fold improvement (0.6 ± 0.1 to 0.3 ± 0.1, P＜.001). Although the selective debridement group experienced a 3-fold improvement (0.3 ± 0.1 to 0.1 ± 0.1, P＜.001). Significant improvement of the patient-reported outcome was shown in both groups at final follow-up without significant difference between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The mid-term clinical outcomes are comparable between the labral repair using looped type suture and selective labral debridement group. Although a gap between the labrum and articular cartilage may appear in 3-dimensional double-echo steady-state magnetic resonance imaging results after labral repair, it does not correspond with clinical outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Editorial Commentary: Diminished Hip Labral Width May Predict Inferior Outcome After Hip Femoroacetabular Impingement Surgery: Diminutive Labral Width Is a Relative Indication for Labral Reconstruction

Hip labral "width" should be defined as the distance from the chondrolabral junction to the tip of the labrum in triangular cross-section. "Height" should refer to the distance from the joint surface to the perilabral recess (perpendicular to the width). "Length" is the distance from the anterior end of the labrum, adjacent to the anterior transverse acetabular ligament (TAL), to the posterior end of the labrum, adjacent to the posterior TAL (as may be relevant in reconstructions). Most studies of labral size focus on width, as it is thought to most contribute to the suction seal effect and hip stability. Magnetic resonance imaging most accurately measures labral width. Labral width at the time of surgery should be considered its maximal size; the labrum is reduced in size after repair. Hypoplastic labrums may result in worse outcomes after hip arthroscopy, and hyperplastic labrums may result in higher scores than normoplastic labrums in patients with primary femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Diminutive labral width is a relative indication for labral reconstruction.

Changes in Hip Labral Size Two Years After Arthroscopic Repair Are Correlated With Preoperative Measurements on Magnetic Resonance Imaging

PURPOSE

The purposes of our study were 1) to investigate the potential change of labral size after arthroscopic repair and 2) to analyze the relationship between acetabular labral size and functional outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, patients diagnosed with labral tear and undergoing hip arthroscopic repair in our institution between September 2016 and December 2018 were included. Magnetic resonance imaging was obtained preoperatively and postoperatively, and the labral length and labral height were measured in three anatomic sites: 11:30, 1:30, and 3:00 positions. All patients completed at least 2-year follow-up. Patients whose preoperative labral size in any position wider than 2 standard deviation away from the mean were identified as the hypertrophic labrum group and were compared with the control in radiographic variables and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the visual analog scale (VAS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) and the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL).

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients (82 hips) were included, and the mean follow-up period was 39.54 ± 8.48 months. Significant improvement in PROs was determined before and after surgeries. Twelve patients were identified with labral hypertrophy and had higher postoperative mHHS scores, higher postoperative iHOT-12 scores, and greater improvement in HOS-ADL compared with the control group. Patients with larger preoperative anterosuperior labral height exhibited more favorable clinical outcomes. Meanwhile, no significantly morphologic change in labral size was determined.

CONCLUSION

There is no significantly morphologic change in labral size of superior, anterosuperior, and anterior labrum after arthroscopic repair. Patients with hypertrophic labrum achieved more favorable clinical outcomes compared with those with normal-sized labrum.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative prognostic trial.

Editorial Commentary: Surgeons Planning Hip Labral Arthroscopic Repair Should Have a Backup Plan of Labral Reconstruction or Augmentation Based on Intraoperative Labral Degeneration, Hypoplasia, or Ossification

The arena of hip arthroscopy has seen leaps in practices over the past decade, evolving from surgical debridement of the labrum to improvements in techniques which now allow repair, augmentation, and circumferential reconstruction. But as the operating theater continues to change its act, so too must the preoperative choreography. Recent advancements in the understanding of preoperative risk factors for failure of primary labral repair have identified the diminutive or hypoplastic labra on prescreening magnetic resonance imaging as a negative predictor of success. While this quantitative assessment predicts the anatomical coverage of the labrum, we are still limited in our ability to qualify the latter's tissue substance preoperatively. Ossified or degenerative labra may not have the inherent functional capacity to restore the suction seal of the hip in a primary repair setting. If the applause from the audience fails to reach a significant threshold, we must rethink our act, and that begins with the choreography. The next step in hip arthroscopy is determining if a primary augmentation or reconstruction, in lieu of primary repair, warrants further consideration. Until we develop reliable methods of quantifying and qualifying the labral tissue, both preoperatively and optimally, we should establish backup for surprises encountered while on the "stage."

A higher proportion of patients may reach the MCID with capsular closure in patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to provide a summary of the techniques and outcomes of various capsular management strategies in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). The information this review provides on capsular management strategies will provide surgeons with operative guidance and decision-making when managing patients with FAI lesions arthroscopically.

METHODS

Three databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched from database inception to November 2nd 2021, for literature addressing capsular management of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI. All level I-IV data on capsular management strategy as well as postoperative functional outcomes were recorded. A meta-analysis was used to combine the mean postoperative functional outcomes using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, there were a total of 36 studies and 4744 patients included in this review. The mean MINORS score was 10.7 (range 8-13) for non-comparative studies and 17.6 (range 15-20) for comparative studies. Three comparative studies in 1302 patients examining the proportion of patients reaching the MCID for the mHHS score in patients undergoing interportal capsulotomy with either capsular repair or no repair found that the capsular repair group had a higher odds ratio of reaching the MCID at 1.46 (95% CI 0.61-3.45, I² = 67%, Fig. 2, Table 3); however, this difference was not significant with a p value of 0.39. When looking at only level 1 and 2 studies, four studies in 1308 patients reporting on the mHHS score in patients undergoing capsular closure regardless of capsulotomy type, found a pooled standardized mean difference in the mHHS score of 2.1 (95% CI 1.7-2.55, I² = 70%, Fig. 3), while four studies in 402 patients reporting on the mHHS score in patients not undergoing capsular closure regardless of capsulotomy type found a pooled standardized mean difference in the mHHS score of 1.46 (95% CI 1.2-1.7, I² = 30%, Fig. 4).

CONCLUSION

This review may demonstrate improved postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing complete capsular closure regardless of capsulotomy type based on postoperative mHHS score. Furthermore, this review may suggest improved postoperative outcomes after closure of an interportal capsulotomy. There are limited published outcome data regarding T-type capsulotomy without closure. This review provides surgeons with operative guidance on capsular management strategies when treating patients with FAI lesions arthroscopically.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

[Labral lesions in femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: evidence-based treatment]

BACKGROUND

The acetabular labrum and the adjacent rim cartilage are the primary targets of primary or secondary degeneration processes in the hip joint. Currently, femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is considered the main mechanical pathology leading to chondrolabral damage. The treatment options for labrum tears range from a debridement/resection, repair to augmentation or transplantation.

AIM

Description of surgical treatment options for pathologic changes of the acetabulare labrum and their results with a focus on FAIS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed on https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov using the following key words: hip, labrum, therapy, resection, repair, augmentation, reconstruction.

RESULTS

The different surgical procedures as labrum therapy reduce pain and increase the joint function. Labral repair, augmentation, and reconstruction tend to have better results compared to resection but are associated with a higher rate of postoperative intraarticular adhesions.

DISCUSSION

In addition to reducing pain and improving function, the goal of surgical treatment of labrum lesions should be to maintain the functions of the labrum. The labrum should be preserved, in cases of adequate tissue quality and width. In the setting of resective procedures, the resection should be limited to the unstable parts of the labrum. The results of labral augmentation and reconstruction are promising, allowing these procedures to be considered for patients with ongoing symptoms in the revision situation with labral defects or an insufficient residual labrum.

Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement-Associated Labral Tears: Current Status and Future Prospects

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has emerged as a common cause of hip pain, especially in young patients. While the exact cause of FAI is unknown, it is thought to result from repetitive microtrauma to the proximal femoral epiphysis leading to abnormal biomechanics. Patients typically present with groin pain that is exacerbated by hip flexion and internal rotation. Diagnosis of FAI is made through careful consideration of patient presentation as well as physical exam and diagnostic imaging. Use of radiographs can help diagnose both cam and pincer lesions, while the use of MRI can diagnose labral tears and cartilage damage associated with FAI. Both non-operative and surgical options have their role in the treatment of FAI and its associated labral tears; however, hip arthroscopy has had successful outcomes when compared with physical therapy alone. Unfortunately, chondral lesions associated with FAI have had poorer outcomes with a higher conversion rate to arthroplasty. Capsular closure following hip arthroscopy has shown superior clinical outcomes and therefore should be performed if possible. More recently, primary labral reconstruction has emerged in the literature as a good option for irreparable labral tears. While non-operative management may have its role in treating patients with FAI, hip arthroscopy has developed a successful track record in being able to treat cam and pincer lesions, chondral damage, and labral injuries.

Arthroscopic classification of intra-articular hip pathology demonstrates at best moderate interrater reliability

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to report several novel classification systems for intra-articular lesions observed during hip arthroscopy, and to quantify the interrater reliability of both these novel systems and existing classifications of intra-articular lesions when tested by a group of high-volume hip arthroscopists.

METHODS

Five hip arthroscopists deliberated over shortcomings in current classification systems and developed several novel grading systems with particular effort made to capture factors important to the treatment and outcomes of hip arthroscopy for labral injury. A video learning module describing the classifications was then developed from the video archive of surgeries performed by the senior author and reviewed by study participants. Following review of the module, a pilot study was completed using five randomly selected videos, after which participating surgeons met once more to discuss points of disagreement and to seek clarification. The final video collection for testing reliability was composed of 29 videos selected with the intent of capturing all sublevels of each classification scheme. Study participants recorded their assessments using each classification scheme, and interrater reliability was calculated by a study participant not involved in grading.

RESULTS

The average kappa coefficients for the classification schemes ranged from 0.38 to 0.54, with the interrater reliability of all classification schemes except labral degeneration qualifying as moderate. The percent of cases with absolute agreement ranged from 17.2% to 51.7% across the classification systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Even among a group of high-volume hip arthroscopists who engaged in several discussions about the proposed classification schemes, grades were found to have at best moderate interrater reliability. Moderate interrater reliability is demonstrated for novel grading systems for describing labral tear complexity, labral bruising, labral size, and extent of synovitis, and fair reliability is demonstrated for labral degeneration. Further development and refinement of multifactorial grading systems for describing labral injury are indicated. Evaluating the multifactorial nature of intra-articular lesions in the hip is an important part of intraoperative decision-making and defining reliable classifications for intra-articular lesions is a critical first step towards developing generalizable criteria for guiding treatment type.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Evaluation of outcome reporting trends for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome- a systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the trends in the literature regarding surgical treatment for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and to present which patient-reported outcome-measures (PROMs) and surgical approaches are included.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted with the PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was performed on PubMed and Embase, covering studies from 1999 to 2020. Inclusion criteria were clinical studies with surgical treatment for FAIS, the use of PROMs as evaluation tool and studies in English. Exclusion criteria were studies with patients < 18 years, cohorts with < 8 patients, studies with primarily purpose to evaluate other diagnoses than FAIS and studies with radiographs as only outcomes without using PROMs. Data extracted were author, year, surgical intervention, type of study, level of evidence, demographics of included patients, and PROMs.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 2,559 studies, of which 196 were included. There was an increase of 2,043% in the number of studies from the first to the last five years (2004-2008)-(2016-2020). There were 135 (69%) retrospective, 55 (28%) prospective and 6 (3%) Randomized Controlled Trials. Level of evidence ranged from I-IV where Level III was most common (44%). More than half of the studies (58%) originated from USA. Arthroscopic surgery was the most common surgical treatment (85%). Mean follow-up was 27.0 months (± 17 SD), (range 1.5-120 months). Between 1-10 PROMs were included, and the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) was most commonly used (61%).

CONCLUSION

There has been a continuous increase in the number of published studies regarding FAIS with the majority evaluating arthroscopic surgery. The mHHS remains being the most commonly used PROM.

Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopic Treatment for Diminutive Hip Labral Size: Go Big or Go Home?

The diminutive (or hypoplastic or hypotrophic) hip labrum presents a unique surgical challenge in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome for many hip arthroscopists. Insufficient labral tissue leads to increased risk for suture cutout or overeversion, with resulting loss of suction seal when attempting arthroscopic repair. Although some surgeons have demonstrated clinical improvement after performing primary refixation of the diminutive labrum, others have reported inferior outcomes for patients with labral width <4 mm compared with patients having normal or larger labral width. Alternative treatment methods, including labral reconstruction or labral augmentation with autograft or allograft, may be effective, based on select single-surgeon studies. As further research is needed to fully evaluate outcomes of these techniques, hip arthroscopists should recognize the difficult task at hand and be prepared to use assorted treatment options to augment a diminutive labrum. Larger labra can maintain contact with the femoral head after repair, and techniques such as labral base fixation can help to preserve this interaction and recreate the suction seal.

Editorial Commentary: Hip Hypotrophic Labrum Should Not Change Our Treatment Algorithm: Welcome to the Augmented Reality of the Hip-Preservation Zone

Current treatment for labral pathology continues to be of some debate; debride, repair, or reconstruct. There are many factors hip preservationists consider when treating the labrum, and the size of the labrum is one. Some feel that small labral tissue with tears cannot function as well as larger tissue when repaired, and others feel that all labrum need removed and reconstructed in a primary setting. This conundrum leads us to continued research to define the best practices in hip preservation.