Clinical and radiographical results of labral reconstruction

Microfracture of Acetabular Rim After Segmental Labral Resection to Restore the Morphology and Function of Labrum: A Retrospective Study of More than 2 Years Follow-up

Objective

To report on the clinical outcome of patients undergoing combined arthroscopic treatment of labral resection and microfracture at the rim of acetabulum at a minimum 2‐year follow‐up.

Methods

The retrospective study included 38 patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for irreparable labral injury from 24 February 2014 to 26 February 2018. Thirteen patients were excluded owing to patient refusal of participation and concomitant diseases like synovial chondromatosis and dysplasia hip. The study group consisted of patients undergoing combined arthroscopic labral resection and microfracture at the rim of acetabulum (MICRO Group: 20 patients), arthroscopic labral resection alone (RESEC Group: five patients). Postoperative three‐dimensional (3D) double‐echo steady‐state (DESS) sequence with radial imaging at 3 Tesla were obtained and fluoroscopic image of the involved hip under distraction were used to observe the restoration of vacuum effect. Patient‐reported outcome scores (PROs) including the Harris Hip Score (HHS), Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living Subscale (HOS‐ADL), Hip Outcome Score Sport‐Specific Subscale (HOS‐SSS) were collected and compared between two groups.

Results

All patients were followed up for at least 6 months. The follow‐up time of RESEC group is longer than MICRO group (46.6 months vs 23.9 months, P < 0.05). The 3D DESS imaging demonstrated intermediate signal intensity at the relative area where the labrum resected followed by microfracture at the acetabular rim in MICRO group. Meanwhile, regrowth of labrum‐like tissue was not observed in MRI imaging of the RESEC group. Furthermore, vacuum effect was more apparent in MICRO group compared with RESEC group. All PROs in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement at follow‐up compared with preoperative levels. RESEC group: HHS (73.0 vs 93.8, P < 0.05); HOS‐ADL (51.5 vs 89.1, P < 0.05); HOS‐SSS (47.8 vs 88.3, P < 0.05); VAS (6.4 vs 2.0, P < 0.05). MICRO group: HHS (70.5 vs 91.5, P < 0.05); HOS‐ADL (52.4 vs 87.0, P < 0.05); HOS‐SSS (48.1 vs 86.5, P < 0.05); VAS (6.3 vs 1.6, P < 0.05). One patient of MICRO group had transient neurapraxias of the pudendal nerve that resolved completely by 3 months. There showed no statistically significant difference between groups regarding the preoperative and postoperative PROs.

Conclusion

Compared to labral resection, combined arthroscopic labral resection and microfracture at the rim of acetabulum is able to fulfill the labral defect area with the potential to restore the seal effect of labrum as an effective and safe option for irreparable segmental labral tears.

The Efficacy of Labral Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Background:

With a greater understanding of the importance of the acetabular labrum in the function of the hip, labral repair is preferred over debridement. However, in some scenarios, preservation or repair of the labrum is not possible, and labral reconstruction procedures have been growing in popularity as an alternative to labral resection.

Purpose:

To provide an up-to-date analysis of the literature to determine the overall efficacy of labral reconstruction when compared with labral repair or resection.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were searched for literature regarding labral reconstruction in the hip before July 21, 2020. The results were screened and evaluated by 2 reviewers, and a third reviewer resolved any discrepancies. The final studies were evaluated using the MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies) score.

Results:

There were 7 comparative studies that fit the inclusion criteria, with 228 hips from 197 patients. The mean follow-up was 34.6 months, and the mean age of all patients was 38.34 years. There were slightly more female patients than male patients (105 vs 92). Arthroscopic reconstruction was performed in 86% of studies (6/7); open surgical techniques, in 14% (1/7). A variety of grafts was used in the reconstructions. The indications for labral reconstruction and outcome measures varied in these publications. Nine patients were lost follow-up, and 6 patients converted to total hip replacement postlabral reconstruction. The assessment of these comparative studies illustrated statistically equivalent results between labral reconstruction and labral repair. Comparisons of labral reconstruction with labral resection also showed statistically equivalent postoperative patient-reported outcome scores; however, the rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty were significantly higher in the population undergoing resection.

Conclusion:

The review of current available comparative literature, which consists entirely of level 3 studies, suggests that labral reconstruction does improve postoperative outcomes but does not demonstrate superiority over repair. There may, however, be benefit to performing labral reconstruction over resection owing to the higher rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty in the labral resection group.

Diagnosis and treatment of labral tear

Objective:

To review the literature regarding diagnosis and treatment of labral tear.

Data sources:

A systematic search was performed in PubMed using various search terms and their combinations including hip, labrum, acetabular labral tear, arthroscopy, diagnosis, and anatomy.

Study selection:

For each included study, information regarding anatomy, function, etiology, diagnosis, and management of acetabular labral tear was extracted.

Results:

Five hundred and sixty abstracts about anatomy, function, etiology, diagnosis, and management of acetabular labral tear were reviewed and 66 selected for full-text review. The mechanism of labral tear has been well explained while the long-term outcomes of various treatment remains unknown.

Conclusions:

Labral tear is generally secondary to femoroacetabular impingement, trauma, dysplasia, capsular laxity, and degeneration. Patients with labral tear complain about anterior hip or groin pain most commonly with a most consistent physical examination called positive anterior hip impingement test. Magnetic resonance arthrography is a reliable radiographic examination with arthroscopy being the gold standard. Conservative treatment consists of rest, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication, pain medications, modification of activities, physical therapy, and intra-articular injection. When fail to respond to conservative treatment, surgical treatment including labral debridement, labral repair, and labral reconstruction is often indicated.

Labral augmentation with ligamentum capitis femoris: presentation of a new technique and preliminary results

Preservation of an intact labrum and reconstruction of a deficient or worn acetabular labrum are accepted techniques in modern hip surgery. If the remaining labrum is very thin, its intact tip can be preserved and its volume restored with a ligamentum teres graft. Technique and preliminary results of this augmentation technique are presented. Labral augmentation was performed in 16 hips (11 rights) in 16 patients (7 males, mean age 29 years) during surgical dislocation for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. The acetabular index, lateral center edge angle, asphericity angle and acetabular retroversion index were determined on preoperative X-rays and magnetic resonance imaging. The pre- and postoperative Merle d'Aubigné and Postel score (MdA) was calculated and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) obtained after 1 year. There were seven Grade 1 and nine Grade 0 hips (Tönnis classification). Mean lateral center edge was 29°. The mean acetabular index was 1.85°. Mean asphericity angle was 62.5°. Mean acetabular retroversion index was 23.4%. Mean MdA improved from 14.5 preoperatively to 17 at 1 year (P < 0.0001). Mean OHS after 1 year was 42. Previous surgery was a risk factor for inferior results: OHS was 44.5 in hips without versus 26 in hips with previous surgery. Mean MdA improved from 15 to 17.5 in patients without previous surgery versus 14 to 16 for the group with previous surgery. Augmentation of the labrum using ligamentum teres shows good clinical results after 1 year. Patients with previous hip surgery had inferior results.