Comparable Torque to Failure Using the Simple Stich Versus the Figure-of-Eight Configuration for Hip Capsular Closure Following an Interportal Capsulotomy: A Cadaveric Study

Characterizations of Capsule Closure in Hip Arthroscopy Are Infrequently and Incompletely Reported: A Systematic Review

Purpose

To review the recent literature to provide an updated characterization of capsule closure techniques in hip arthroscopy and to determine if the characteristics of closure impacted clinical outcomes.

Methods

In keeping with the Preferred Reporting in Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review was performed with the following eligibility criteria: patients over 18 years of age who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with reporting of patient reported outcome measures or revision/failure, and a sufficiently detailed description of capsule closure. The GRADE framework evaluated study quality, and ROBINS-I evaluated the risk of bias.

Results

Across 18 studies (N = 3277) an interportal capsulotomy was reported in 12 studies (1972/3277) cases, and a T-type capsulotomy was reported in six studies (1305/3277) cases). Six studies reported using #2 suture. Nonabsorbable suture was reported in six studies, and absorbable suture in six studies. The rate of failure was 10.5% across five studies (N = 1133) and the rate of revision was 4.4% across 13 studies (N = 2957).

Conclusions

Capsule closure is commonly performed with #2 high strength suture-the T-type using two to three sutures in the vertical limb and two to three in the transverse limb, and the interportal type using two to three sutures. Compared to earlier reports, there is a trend for increased utilization of T-type capsulotomy. Although there is a growing body of investigations into the efficacy of routine capsule closure following hip arthroscopy, our results demonstrate infrequent and inconsistent reporting of capsule closure characteristics.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Hip Capsular Closure in Distraction: A Technique to Allow Easier Closure of T and Interportal Capsulotomies

Capsule closure during hip arthroscopy is increasingly being shown to optimize outcomes and minimize complications. Although various techniques and suture configurations have been described, closure of the hip capsule remains a technically challenging step for many hip arthroscopists. The purpose of this Technical Note is to summarize capsular management in arthroscopic hip-preservation surgery and to outline a technique of passing capsule sutures under hip traction. This technique is useful, as it facilitates adequate visualization of the vertical limb of the T capsulotomy and interportal capsulotomy, which is difficult when attempted with the hip out of traction and flexed. Our technique also helps to reduce the risk of iatrogenic cartilage injury during suture passage by increasing the distance between the femoral head and capsule leaflets, or the functional working area for capsule closure.

Editorial Commentary: Restoration of Hip Capsular Tension Is More Important Than Repair Construct Configuration

The debate regarding optimal capsular management during hip arthroscopy has been evolving for over 20 years. Femoroacetabular impingement emerged in the arthroscopic world in the early 2000s. However, the ability to address osseous deformities and decompress and/or reshape them was limited by the hip capsular structures and small capsulotomies. Some surgeons attempted to arthroscopically manage these deformities with limited capsulotomies, with not surprisingly limited success. Others made larger capsular windows (capsulectomies) to more accurately manage these deformities but potentially left some patients with varying degrees of iatrogenic microinstability or macroinstability. Over time, an increasing awareness of post-arthroscopy instability in the form of case reports, case series, and backroom chatter among the hip arthroscopy thought leaders brought the idea of routine capsular closure to the forefront. Biomechanical studies defined the role of the hip capsular ligaments, the deficits created with various capsulotomies during surgery, and the ability to restore stability after capsular repair. Clinical studies revealed better outcomes and lower revision rates after capsular repair for subtle osseous and soft-tissue instability, revision cases, and athletes compared with unrepaired capsulotomies. Various capsular repair constructs (side-to-side repairs, capsular shifts, and various suture configurations and suture materials) have been proposed, without evidence to support a superior technique or suture material. In the end, capsular management is an evolving art that takes into account various patient-specific factors (i.e., individual activity requirements, soft-tissue and osseous parameters, and intraoperative impressions) with the end goal of achieving a stable, impingement-free joint. There might be various capsular management roads to travel, but the destination remains the same.