Tenotomy for Iliopsoas Pathology is Infrequently Performed and Associated with Poorer Outcomes in Hips Undergoing Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

A Multicenter Analysis of 3 Decades of Hip Arthroscopy: Evolving Techniques and Growing Patient Volumes From 1988 to 2022

Background

The number of hip arthroscopies performed in the United States has grown significantly over the past several decades, with evolving indications and emerging techniques.

Purposes

To (1) examine the evolution of hip arthroscopy at 3 tertiary referral centers between 1988 and 2022 and (2) quantify trends in patient demographics and procedures performed.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy at 3 academic centers between 1988 and 2022. Demographic data were collected using standardized forms and operative notes, and intraoperative images were manually reviewed for each patient to determine the specific procedures performed at the time of the hip arthroscopy. Surgical procedures were plotted over time to evaluate trends. Patients were divided into 3 time periods for comparison: early hip arthroscopy from 1988 to 2008, 2009 (the time of the first labral repair in our cohort) to 2015, and 2016 to 2022.

Results

A total of 3000 patients (age, 35.7 ± 13.8 years; age range, 10-89 years; female sex, 2109 (70.3%); body mass index, 27.4 ± 6.3 kg/m2) underwent arthroscopic hip procedures between 1988 and 2022. The mean number of cases increased from a mean of 3.2 per year in 1988-2008 to 285.9 per year in 2016-2022 (P < .001). Labral treatment at the time of primary hip arthroscopy evolved from 100% debridement and 0% repair in 1988-2008 to 5.0% debridement, 94.0% repair, and 1.0% labral reconstruction in 2016-2022 (P < .001). Cam resection increased from 4.1% in 1988-2008 to 86.9% in 2016-2022 (P < .001). By 2022, 45 out of 325 cases (13.8%) were revisions. The rate of capsular repair at the time of primary hip arthroscopy increased from 0.0% in 1988-2008 up to 81.0% in 2016-2022.

Conclusion

There has been a significant growth of hip arthroscopy volumes as well as a significant transition from use as a tool for diagnosis and labral debridement to procedures restoring native anatomy including labral repair, cam resection, capsular repair, periacetabular osteotomy, and gluteal repair.

The Iliopsoas: Anatomy, Clinical Evaluation, and Its Role in Hip Pain in the Athlete: A Scoping Review

Disability due to iliopsoas (IP) pain and dysfunction is underdiagnosed in the athletic population. The IP unit consists of the psoas major and iliacus muscles converging to form the IP tendon and is responsible primarily for hip flexion strength but has a number of secondary contributions such as femoral movement, trunk rotation, core stabilization, and dynamic anterior stability to the hip joint. As the IP passes in front of the anterior acetabulum and labrum, the diagnosis of IP pain may be confused with labral tearing seen on magnetic resonance imaging. This is in addition to the low sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging to detect IP tendinitis and bursitis. Resisted seated hip flexion as well as direct palpation of the IP tendon and muscle belly are useful to assess function and help determine whether the IP may be the source of pain, which is common in athletes. Both biomechanical and clinical investigations have demonstrated the role of IP as an anterior hip stabilizer. Patients with signs of hip microinstability, developmental dysplasia of the hip, and increased femoral anteversion are at risk of IP pain and poor outcomes after IP lengthening, highlighting the importance of the IP in providing dynamic anterior hip stability.

Long-Term Outcomes of Arthroscopic Labral Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adolescents: A Nested Propensity-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroscopy has demonstrated effectiveness as a treatment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in adult patients, with promising long-term outcomes. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding the adolescent population. The purposes of our study were to report on survivorship and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at a minimum 10-year follow-up in adolescent patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAI and labral tears and to compare the survivorship and outcomes of this population with those of a nested, propensity-matched adult control group.

METHODS

Data regarding adolescent patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between February 2008 and January 2012 were reviewed. Patients with a minimum 10-year follow-up for the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were eligible. The exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip conditions or surgical procedures, a Tönnis grade of >1, or dysplasia. In the subanalysis, adolescent patients were matched to young adult patients with use of a 1:1 ratio on the basis of sex, body mass index, Tönnis grade, lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), labral treatment, capsular treatment, and additional procedures performed during the surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients (61 female and 13 male; 74 hips) with a mean (and standard deviation) age of 16.7 ± 1.4 years and a minimum follow-up of 10 years were included. The latest follow-up occurred at a mean of 125.4 ± 5.3 months (range, 120.0 to 144.1 months). Significant improvement in all PROs from baseline and 100% survivorship were demonstrated at the 10-year follow-up. In the subanalysis, 58 adolescent hips were propensity-matched to 58 young adult hips. The adolescent group had higher postoperative scores for the HOS-SSS (p = 0.021), NAHS (p = 0.021), and iHOT-12 (p = 0.042) than the young adult group. Patient satisfaction at the latest follow-up was also significantly higher in the adolescent group (p = 0.00061). The rate of survivorship free from conversion to THA was similar between the adolescent and control groups (100% versus 96.6%; p = 0.200).

CONCLUSIONS

Adolescents undergoing hip arthroscopy for the treatment of FAI and labral tears demonstrated excellent outcomes and a high rate of survivorship. These outcomes were superior to those seen in a matched adult group. The results of this study indicate that hip arthroscopy in adolescents is a safe procedure that leads to improvement in outcomes at long-term follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

The role of iliopsoas fractional lengthening in hip arthroscopy: a systematic review

Arthroscopic iliopsoas fractional lengthening (IFL) is a surgical option for the treatment of internal snapping hip syndrome (ISHS) after failing conservative management. Systematic review. A search of PubMed central, National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE) and Scopus databases were performed by two individuals from the date of inception to April 2023. Inclusion criteria were ISHS treated with arthroscopy. Sample size, patient-reported outcomes and complications were recorded for 24 selected papers. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed and registered on PROSPERO database for systematic reviews (CRD42023427466). Thirteen retrospective case series, ten retrospective comparative studies, and one randomized control trial from 2005 to 2022 were reported on 1021 patients who received an iliopsoas fractional lengthening. The extracted data included patient satisfaction, visual analogue scale, the modified Harris hip score and additional outcome measures. All 24 papers reported statistically significant improvements in post-operative patient-reported outcome measures after primary hip arthroscopy and iliopsoas fractional lengthening. However, none of the comparative studies found a statistical benefit in performing IFL. Existing studies lack conclusive evidence on the benefits of Iliopsoas Fractional Lengthening (IFL), especially for competitive athletes, individuals with Femoroacetabular Impingement (FAI), and borderline hip dysplasia. Some research suggests IFL may be a safe addition to hip arthroscopy for Internal Snapping Hip Syndrome, but more comprehensive investigations are needed. Future studies should distinguish between concurrent procedures and develop methods to determine if the psoas muscle is the source of pain, instead of solely attributing it to the joint.

Multifid Iliopsoas Tendons Are More Common in Patients With Painful Snapping Iliopsoas Tendons

Purpose

To retrospectively determine the prevalence of multifid tendons in a population of patients who underwent iliopsoas release for painful snapping iliopsoas tendons.

Methods

Patients who underwent iliopsoas release for painful snapping iliopsoas tendons were retrospectively identified from a database of patients who had undergone arthroscopic hip surgery performed by a single surgeon between 2011 and 2020. Patients who had incomplete data or who underwent prior fracture fixation, joint arthroplasty, pelvic surgery, or other interventions for snapping hip were excluded. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and operative reports were reviewed and compared with those of an age-matched control group of patients who had undergone hip or pelvic MRI examinations in the past year for different indications.

Results

This study included 91 patients (78 female and 13 male patients; mean age, 23.3 years) who were treated operatively for painful snapping hip and 78 controls (54 female and 24 male patients; mean age, 28.4 years) who received hip or pelvic MRI for other indications. Among the patients who underwent iliopsoas release, there were 5 unifid iliopsoas tendons (5.5%) compared with 86 multifid iliopsoas tendons (94.5%) when classified with MRI whereas operative examination showed 19 unifid tendons (20.9%) compared with 72 multifid tendons (79.1%, P < .001). When the MRI scans of the operative group were compared with the MRI scans of the control group, the patients who underwent surgery for painful snapping hip had a higher rate of multifid tendons (94.5% of operative hips compared with 69.2% of control right hips [P < .001] and 74.4% of control left hips [P < .001]). However, when the operative reports were used to classify the iliopsoas tendon, there was no significance between the operative and control groups (79.1% of operative hips had multifid tendons compared with 69.2% of control right hips [P = .141] and 74.4% of control left hips [P = .464]).

Conclusions

For patients with symptomatic snapping hip undergoing iliopsoas lengthening, multifid iliopsoas tendons are more prevalent than in a control population.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, prognostic case series.

Patients With Concomitant Painful External Snapping Hip and Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndromes Reported Complete Snapping Resolution With Release of the Gluteus Maximus and Iliotibial Band, and Comparable Minimum 2-Year Outcomes to a Propensity-Matched Control Group

PURPOSE

To report minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and painful external snapping hip (ESH) treatment and ESH resolution, and to compare these PROMs to a benchmark FAIS propensity-matched control group without ESH.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed between November 2009 and April 2018. Patients were eligible if they were preoperatively diagnosed with FAIS and painful ESH and received primary hip arthroscopy to address these pathologies. ESH was treated with gluteus maximus and iliotibial band releases. Inclusion criteria were baseline and minimum two-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale for pain. Exclusion criteria were Tönnis grade >1 and previous hip conditions. A secondary subanalysis was performed to benchmark these outcomes to a FAIS propensity-matched control group without ESH, according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), Tönnis grade, and preoperative lateral center-edge and α-angles using a 1:3 ratio. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the maximum outcome improvement (MOI) rates were reported.

RESULTS

Twenty-two hips (21 patients) were included. The mean age, BMI, and follow-up were 31.3 years ± 14.0, 26 kg/m² ± 5.0, and 31.4 months ± 4.4, respectively, with 68.2% being female. ESH was resolved in 100% of patients. Significant improvement for all PROMs at a minimum two-year (P < .001) was reported. The minimum two-year PROMs and the rate of achieving the MCID and MOI threshold were comparable to the control group.

CONCLUSION

Following primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS and painful ESH, patients demonstrated significant improvement in all PROMs, and the rate of resolution of ESH was 100% at minimum two-year follow-up: with gluteus maximus and iliotibial band releases. Functional outcomes and rates of MCID and MOI achievement were comparable to a FAIS propensity-matched benchmark control group without ESH.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Competitive Athletes with Femoroacetabular Impingement and Painful Internal Snapping Treated Arthroscopically with Intrabursal Iliopsoas Fractional Lengthening: High Rate of Return to Sport and Favorable Midterm Functional Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Athletes with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) who undergo hip arthroscopy with iliopsoas fractional lengthening (IFL) in the context of painful internal snapping have demonstrated favorable patient-reported outcomes (PROs), return to sport (RTS), and resolution of internal snapping symptoms at short term follow-up. Midterm outcomes have not been established.

PURPOSES

(1) To report minimum 5-year PROs and RTS rate in competitive athletes who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS and intra-bursal IFL for painful internal snapping and (2) to compare these clinical results with those of a propensity score-matched control group of competitive athletes who underwent primary hip arthroscopy without painful internal snapping and IFL.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Data were reviewed for consecutive surgeries performed by a single surgeon between February 2010 and December 2013. Patients were considered eligible if they were professional, collegiate, or high school athletes and received a primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS and intra-bursal IFL without extended capsulotomy for painful internal snapping. Indications for IFL were painful internal snapping on preoperative physical examination. Inclusion criteria were preoperative and minimum 5-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale for pain. Rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference were also reported. For comparison, athletes in the IFL group were propensity matched by age, sex, body mass index, lateral and anterior center-edge angles, and sports level to a control group of athletes without internal snapping who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS without IFL.

RESULTS

A total of 105 competitive athletes in the IFL group were included in the study with a follow-up of 66.8 ± 6.9 months (mean ± SD). The IFL cohort showed significant improvement in all recorded PROs at minimum 5-year follow-up (P < .001). Furthermore, they demonstrated favorable rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference for the modified Harris Hip Score (82.0%), Nonarthritic Hip Score (85.4%), and Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (82.8%). Further, 89.5% of athletes in the IFL cohort successfully returned to sport. A total of 42 athletes in the IFL group were propensity matched to 54 control athletes. When groups were compared, they demonstrated similar improvement in PROs and rates of RTS, revision arthroscopy, and achieving psychometric thresholds.

CONCLUSION

Competitive athletes undergoing primary hip arthroscopy and intra-bursal IFL in the context of FAIS and painful internal snapping demonstrated favorable PROs and RTS rate at minimum 5-year follow-up. These results were comparable with those of a control group of athletes not requiring IFL.

Editorial Commentary: Psoas Tenotomy in the Setting of a Borderline Dysplastic Hip Risks Iatrogenic Instability: Be Extremely Cautious and Particularly in Athletes

Successful outcomes after psoas tenotomies have been reported and proposed in the setting of recalcitrant internal snapping and psoas impingement. However, case reports citing hip flexion weakness and iatrogenic instability created concern regarding the role for psoas tenotomies. Despite these concerns, some recent studies reporting improved outcomes after endoscopic psoas tenotomies breathe further life into this controversial topic. Psoas tenotomy in the setting of a borderline dysplastic hip likely carries an even greater risk for iatrogenic instability. It might be critical to evaluate for clinical signs and symptoms of instability in addition to radiographic parameters to avoid this potentially devastating complication. In addition, the traditional definition of borderline dysplasia is based on lateral acetabular coverage that might be less important than anterior acetabular coverage and femoral version when contemplating psoas tenotomies on the basis of the dynamic anterior stabilizing effect of the iliopsoas myotendinous unit. Surgeons should also be extremely cautious when considering psoas tenotomy in an athletic population with the potential for persistent weakness and limited data hinting at inferior sports specific outcomes. In the end, it is not clear whether the psoas tenotomy "drives" the improvements seen in some studies, or whether many of these patients ultimately battle their way into a minimally clinically important difference "despite" the psoas tenotomy.

Revision Hip Arthroscopy in the Native Hip: A Review of Contemporary Evaluation and Treatment Options

Hip arthroscopy is a reproducible and efficacious procedure for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Despite this efficacy, clinical failures are observed, clinical entities are challenging to treat, and revision hip arthroscopy may be required. The most common cause of symptom recurrence after a hip arthroscopy that leads to a revision arthroscopy is residual cam morphology as a result of inadequate femoral osteochondroplasty and restoration of head–neck offset, though several other revision etiologies including progressive chondral and labral pathologies also exist. In these cases, it is imperative to perform a comprehensive examination to identify the cause of a failed primary arthroscopy as to assess whether or not a revision hip arthroscopy procedure is indicated. When a secondary procedure is indicated, approaches may consist of revision labral repair, complete labral reconstruction, or labral augmentation depending on labral integrity. Gross instability or imaging-based evidence of microinstability may necessitate capsular augmentation or plication. If residual cam or pincer morphology is present, additional resection of the osseous abnormalities may be warranted. This review article discusses indications, the evaluation of patients with residual symptoms after primary hip arthroscopy, and the evaluation of outcomes following revision hip arthroscopy through an evidence-based discussion. We also present a case example of a revision hip arthroscopy procedure to highlight necessary intraoperative techniques during a revision hip arthroscopy.

Editorial Commentary: Indiscriminate Iliopsoas Tenotomy May Cause Complications-With Tight Indications and Transbursal Lengthening, We May Avoid Them

Surgical management of iliopsoas pathology that fails conservative treatment is controversial. Potential complications following iliopsoas tenotomy include recurrent painful internal snapping, postoperative pain, and hip flexor weakness. Concerns are even greater in dysplastic patients, in whom the iliopsoas may play a role as an anteromedial hip stabilizer. Although data demonstrate arthroscopic iliopsoas tenotomy for painful internal snapping as safe and effective, its use has declined for the reasons stated above. On the other hand, procedures such as capsular plication with inferior shift and anatomic labral repair, augmentation, and reconstruction have made it possible to restore the primary stabilizers in many cases of hip instability. In these cases, iliopsoas fractional lengthening (IFL) with avoidance of collateral damage to the musculature or capsule can successfully treat painful internal snapping hip. We recommend iliopsoas lengthening when (1) there is painful internal snapping, (2) IFL can be performed without collateral damage, (3) the primary soft tissue stabilizers can be restored or augmented, and (4) there is no bony morphology likely to cause continued instability.