How Many Radiographs Does It Take to Screen for Femoral Cam Morphology?: A Noninferiority Study

Approach to a Failed Hip Arthroscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hip arthroscopy has seen increasing utilization over the last decade. This is largely related to increased recognition and improved techniques for treating femoroacetabilar impingement (FAI). Though hip arthroscopy generally yields favorable outcomes, there are a subset of patients who have residual or recurrent symptoms that require reoperation. The current review discusses an algorithmic approach to evaluating patients following a failed hip arthroscopy including a framework for clinical and radiographic assessment, available treatment options, and associated outcomes in revision surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Residual FAI has been demonstrated to be the most common indication for revision arthroscopy. Other indications include residual or recurrent labral pathology, gross instability, microinstability, or adhesions. Appropriate history and imaging are important to determine the cause for residual symptoms. Novel techniques including labral and capsular reconstruction, and modified remplissage procedures have been developed to deal with complex revision cases. Though studies have shown improved outcomes after revision surgery, they have been shown to result in inferior outcomes compared to a matched cohort following primary hip arthroscopy. Management of a failed hip arthroscopy remains a complex problem. Focused history, cross-sectional imaging, and revision hip arthroscopy with novel techniques can improve outcomes, albeit to a lesser extent than patients undergoing successful primary hip arthroscopy. The information provided here can help guide treatment and set appropriate patient expectations for revision surgery.

Editorial Commentary: Modified False-Profile View-Two Birds With One Stone?

Pathology in the hip is most commonly described using radiographic parameters. Accurately delineating this pathology is paramount in proper diagnosis and care. The anterior center-edge angle measures the anterior coverage of the acetabulum, which has implications in treating the hip. The modified false-profile view will allow visualization of not only the anterior coverage of the femoral head but also the patient's alpha angle. As such, the modified false-profile view could replace both the standard false-profile view and the 45° Dunn view, essentially reducing by 1 the number of images required to evaluate patients presenting with hip symptoms. A disadvantage is that hip instability may be more difficult to identify radiographically.