Endoscopic Hip Abductor Tendon Repair Results in Successful Outcomes With 5- to 10-Year Follow-Up

Parachute Technique for Dermal Allograft Augmentation in Open Gluteal Abductor Repair

Retracted full-thickness tears of the gluteus medius tendon are a well-recognized cause of disabling weakness and pain that significantly impact patients' quality of life. We present an efficient knotless parachute technique for dermal allograft augmentation in open gluteal abductor tendon repairs. Our technique reinforces the suture-tendon interface by incorporating a robust biological scaffold into a knotless double-row fixation. This approach capitalizes on the increased pressure and contact area achieved between the greater trochanter and the dermal allograft/gluteus medius tendon construct without the prominence of knotted sutures.

Editorial Commentary: Time to Recovery Varies After Hip Gluteus Repair: Patient Expectations Should Be Set Accordingly

Patients undergoing endoscopic gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant arthroscopic labral management have been reported to achieve excellent improvement in symptoms and outcome at as far as 5- to 10-year long-term follow-up. Although clinical outcomes at 2 years and onward are successful, few studies investigate how quickly patients improve after surgery. Most patients undergoing gluteus medius and/or minimus for predominantly partial-thickness tears achieve minimal clinically important differences as early as 6 months postoperatively, and a minimum of 1 year is needed for most patients to achieve a patient acceptable symptomatic state. From a patient counseling and satisfaction standpoint, time to recovery is of high importance.

Editorial Commentary: Endoscopic Repair of Abductor Tendon Tears Results in Variable Patient Reported Outcomes and Generally Good to Excellent Results

Abductor tendon pathology is fairly common, with up to a 25% incidence in patients having total hip arthroplasty and 30% having hip arthroscopy. A systematic review of endoscopic abductor tendon repair demonstrated that as few as 41% of patients with endoscopic repair of abductor tendon tears achieve a patient acceptable satisfactory state, but a major limitation of systematic reviews is extreme heterogeneity between included studies. Surgical techniques and skills differ, as do tear severity and confounding pathology such as labral tears. Another limitation is a focus on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). PROMs are important (we prefer happy patients with poor healing to unhappy patients with healed repairs), but PROMs are also "subjective," and different cohorts of patients in different studies from different locations may have different perceptions or goals with regard to pain and function. As surgeons, we are able to observe gait, strength, and, with advanced imaging when indicated or for research purposes, healing. These, combined with PROMs, influence overall assessment of outcome. Experience and review of the literature show that endoscopic surgical repair of abductor tendon tears generally shows good or excellent results. If a patient has significant pain improvement and objectively improved gait, a calculation of an outcome threshold based on a subjective survey may not tell the full story.

Long-term Follow-up After Endoscopic Gluteal Repair Plus Hip Arthroscopy Shows Durable Results Using Validated Patient-Reported Outcome Scores That Largely Exceed the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State

Gluteus medius and minimus tendon pathology is a common cause of lateral hip pain. In patients that are dissatisfied with their hip condition following non-surgical treatment, gluteal repair has demonstrated excellent short-, mid-, and now recently, long-term subjective patient-reported and objective clinician-measured outcomes. In patients with peritrochanteric hip pain, the proportion of their overall hip pain may be influenced by the hip joint due to conditions like Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome (FAIS), acetabular dysplasia, labral tears, and arthritis. Thus, surgical decision-making must include consideration of also addressing the joint at the same time as the gluteal repair. This is sometimes challenging due to the high frequency of observing labral injuries and cam/pincer/dysplasia morphology in patients without symptoms due to the "radiographic abnormalities". Labral pathology is also more prevalent in older patients, which happen to also be those individuals also presenting with symptomatic gluteal tendon pain. Both open and endoscopic approaches to the gluteal tendons have advantages and disadvantages without significant outcomes differences in short- or mid-term. Long-term clinical follow-up of patients treated with endoscopic gluteal repair with or without concomitant hip arthroscopy should be included in large national and international prospective registries using validated, reliable, and responsive patient-reported outcome scores, with clinical importance assessed using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and maximal outcome improvement (MOI).