Oxford consensus on primary cam morphology and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: part 1-definitions, terminology, taxonomy and imaging outcomes

Worker's compensation and no-fault insurance are associated with decreased patient reported outcomes and higher rates of revision at 2 and 5 years follow-up compared to patients with commercial insurance undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement

PURPOSE

To investigate the patient reported outcomes (PROs) of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (HA) for femeroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS), a condition where irregular bone growth in the hip joint leads to friction and pain during movement, who have worker's compensation (WC) or no-fault insurance (NF) versus commercial insurance (CI) at both 2 year and 5 year follow-up.

METHODS

This was a single center, single surgeon, retrospective analysis performed between August 2007 and May 2023 of consecutive patients that underwent HA, a minimally invasive surgical procedure used to diagnose and treat problems inside the hip joint through small incisions, for FAIS. Patients were divided into two cohorts-those with WC/NF and those with commercial insurance (CI). Patient reported outcomes (PROs), which included modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), were collected preoperatively, as well as at least 2-year postoperatively. Additionally, other clinically relevant outcomes variables including prevalence of revision surgery and conversion to total hip arthroplasty were recorded.

RESULTS

Three hundred and forty three patients met inclusion criteria. There were 32 patients in the WC/NF cohort and 311 patients in the commercial cohort. When controlling for age, sex, and Body Mass Index (BMI), WC/NF status was associated with lower mHHS at both 2 year (β = - 8.190, p < 0.01, R2 = 0.092) and 5 year follow-up (β = - 16.60, p < 0.01, R2 = 0.179) and NAHS at 5 year follow up (β = - 13.462, p = 0.03, R2 = 0.148). The WC/NF cohort had a lower rate of achieving Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB) for mHHS at 2-years follow-up (66.7% vs. 84.1%, p = 0.02).The rate of revision hip arthroscopy was significantly higher in the worker's compensation/no fault cohort than the commercial insurance cohort (15.6% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.01). The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the WC/NF cohort was not significantly different than the rate of conversion to THA in the commercial insurance cohort (0.0% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.30).

CONCLUSION

Patients with WC/NF insurance may expect a significant improvement from baseline mHHS and NAHS following HA for FAIS at short-term follow-up. However, this improvement may not be as durable as those experienced by patients with CI. Additionally, WC/NF patients should be counseled that they have a higher risk of undergoing revision hip arthroscopy than similar CI patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Retrospective Comparative Prognostic Investigation.

Consensus methods in patellofemoral pain: how rigorous are they? A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Clinicians treating patients with patellofemoral pain (PFP) rely on consensus statements to make the best practice recommendations in the absence of definitive evidence on how to manage PFP. However, the methods used to generate and assess agreement for these recommendations have not been examined. Our objective was to map the methods used to generate consensus-based recommendations for PFP and apply four novel questions to assess the rigour of consensus development.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and Embase from inception to May 2022 to identify consensus-derived statements or practice guidelines on PFP. The Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis was followed to map the existing evidence. We measured the consensus methods based on four sets of questions addressing the panel composition, application of the consensus method chosen, agreement process and the use of evidence mapping.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All consensus statements or clinical guidelines on PFP were considered.

RESULTS

Twenty-two PFP consensus statements were identified. Panel composition: 3 of the 22 (14%) consensus groups reported the panellists' experience, 2 (9%) defined a desired level of expertise, 10 (45%) reported panellist sex and only 2 (9%) included a patient. Consensus method: 7 of 22 (32%) reported using an established method of consensus measurement/development. Agreement process: 10 of 22 (45%) reported their consensus threshold and 2 (9%) acknowledged dissenting opinions among the panel. Evidence mapping: 6 of 22 (27%) reported using systematic methods to identify relevant evidence gaps.

CONCLUSIONS

PFP consensus panels have lacked diversity and excluded key partners including patients. Consensus statements on PFP frequently fail to use recognised consensus methods, rarely describe how 'agreement' was defined or measured and often neglect to use systematic methods to identify evidence gaps.

ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document (ACCORD) explanation and elaboration: Guidance and examples to support reporting consensus methods

BACKGROUND

When research evidence is limited, inconsistent, or absent, healthcare decisions and policies need to be based on consensus amongst interested stakeholders. In these processes, the knowledge, experience, and expertise of health professionals, researchers, policymakers, and the public are systematically collected and synthesised to reach agreed clinical recommendations and/or priorities. However, despite the influence of consensus exercises, the methods used to achieve agreement are often poorly reported. The ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) guideline was developed to help report any consensus methods used in biomedical research, regardless of the health field, techniques used, or application. This explanatory document facilitates the use of the ACCORD checklist.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This paper was built collaboratively based on classic and contemporary literature on consensus methods and publications reporting their use. For each ACCORD checklist item, this explanation and elaboration document unpacks the pieces of information that should be reported and provides a rationale on why it is essential to describe them in detail. Furthermore, this document offers a glossary of terms used in consensus exercises to clarify the meaning of common terms used across consensus methods, to promote uniformity, and to support understanding for consumers who read consensus statements, position statements, or clinical practice guidelines. The items are followed by examples of reporting items from the ACCORD guideline, in text, tables and figures.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACCORD materials - including the reporting guideline and this explanation and elaboration document - can be used by anyone reporting a consensus exercise used in the context of health research. As a reporting guideline, ACCORD helps researchers to be transparent about the materials, resources (both human and financial), and procedures used in their investigations so readers can judge the trustworthiness and applicability of their results/recommendations.

Capsular attachment on the anterosuperior femoral head-neck junction: A hypothesis about femoroacetabular impingement

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), characterized by a pathological contact between the proximal femur and acetabulum, is a common precursor of hip osteoarthritis. Cam morphology is a bony prominence that causes FAI and frequently forms on the anterosuperior femoral head-neck junction. Despite anatomical consensus regarding the femoral head-neck junction as a boundary area covered by the articular cartilage and joint capsule, it remains unclear whether the joint capsule is continuous with the anterosuperior articular cartilage. For the anatomical consideration of cam morphology formation, this study aimed to investigate the histological characteristics of the capsular attachment on the anterosuperior femoral head-neck junction, particularly focusing on the presence or absence of continuity of the joint capsule to the articular cartilage. A total of 21 anterosuperior regions (seven hips each for the 12:00, 1:30, and 3:00 positions) from seven hips (three males and four females; mean age at death, 68.7 years) were histologically analyzed in this study for quantitative evaluation of the capsular thickness using histological sections stained with Masson's trichrome, as well as qualitative evaluation of the capsular attachment. The present study showed that the joint capsule, which folded proximally to the femoral head-neck junction from the recess, exhibited a blend of the fibrous and synovial regions. Notably, it not only continued with the superficial layer of the articular cartilage, but also attached to the articular cartilage via the fibrocartilage. This continuous region was relatively fibrous with dense connective tissue running in the longitudinal direction. The capsular thickness at the recess point (mean, 1.7 ± 0.9 mm) and those at the distal end of the articular cartilage (0.35 ± 0.16 mm) were significantly greater than the control value for the most superficial layer thickness of the articular cartilage (0.019 ± 0.003 mm) (Dunnett's T3, both p-value <0.001). Based on the fibrous continuity between the joint capsule and articular cartilage and its thickness, this study suggests the anatomical possibility that some mechanical stress can be transmitted from the joint capsule to the articular cartilage at the frequent sites of cam morphology.

Borderline Hip Dysplasia Is Not Associated With Significant Differences in Hip Survivorship or Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To compare hip survivorship and patient-reported outcomes after primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients with versus without comorbid borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) at 2-year follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective matched-cohort study was conducted involving patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS with a single surgeon from 2010 to 2019. BHD was defined as lateral center edge angle (LCEA) of 20 to 25°. Subjects with BHD were matched 1:2 to controls without BHD on age, sex, body mass index, and preoperative modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS). Alpha angle, LCEA, Tönnis angle, and acetabular retroversion signs were measured on preoperative and/or postoperative hip radiographs. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the mHHS and the Non-Arthritic Hip Score. Hip survivorship, outcome scores, and achievement of the minimum clinically important difference were compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test or Fisher exact test, as appropriate. P values <.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

Thirty-one BHD subjects (mean age 36.8 years, 71.0% female) and 62 controls (mean age 38.0 years, 71.0% female) were included. There were no significant intergroup differences in demographics or preoperative radiographic measurements besides LCEA and Tönnis angle (all P > .05). Intraoperatively, subjects with BHD were found to have significantly shorter labral tears (mean 2.6 vs 2.8 clock-face hours, P = .048), but there were no significant intergroup differences in acetabular or femoral cartilage status (all P > .05). Postoperatively, there were no significant intergroup differences in rates of revision arthroscopy (BHD 6.5% vs control 11.3%) or conversion to total hip arthroplasty (BHD 9.7% vs control 1.6%), in 2-year improvement of the mHHS and Non-Arthritic Hip Score, or in minimum clinically important difference achievement rates (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

BHD is not associated with a significant difference in hip survivorship or patient-reported outcomes following primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

No difference in prevalence of postoperative iliopsoas tendinitis in patients undergoing arthroscopic hip surgery when using absorbable versus non-absorbable suture for capsular closure

PURPOSE

The volume of arthroscopic hip surgery has increased dramatically in recent years with iliopsoas tendinitis (IPT) being one of the most common complications of this procedure. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence of post-operative IPT in patients who undergo arthroscopic hip surgery with capsular closure using absorbable versus non-absorbable suture.

METHODS

This is a single center, single surgeon, retrospective analysis performed between August 2007 and May 2023 comparing two cohorts who underwent hip arthroscopy. Patients were divided into those who underwent surgery with capsular closure using absorbable (Vicryl®, Johnson and Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ) suture and those who underwent capsular closure with non-absorbable suture (Suturetape, Arthrex, Naples FL). All patients who underwent primary or revision hip arthroscopy and were at least 2 months post-operation were initially included in the study.

RESULTS

Between August 2007 and May 2023 a total of 1513 hip arthroscopy surgeries were performed. Within this cohort, 1421 hips underwent hip arthroscopy with non-absorbable suture and 64 hips underwent surgery with absorbable suture. There was no significant difference between the proportion of IPT in the non-absorbable cohort (2.3%) versus the absorbable cohort (1.6%) (P = 0.669).

CONCLUSION

Capsular closure with Absorbable sutures was non-inferior to capsular closure with non-absorbable sutures with respect to the proportion of post-operative IPT following hip arthroscopy for FAI. Additionally, the proportion of post-operative IPT was found to be significantly higher in patients undergoing revision versus primary hip arthroscopy, regardless of capsular closure suture type.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Five-Year Outcomes of Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Among Female Patients: Higher Body Mass Index Is Associated With Reduced Clinically Significant Outcomes

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of age, body mass index (BMI), and symptom duration on 5-year clinical outcomes among females following primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of hip arthroscopy patients with a minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients were stratified by age (<30, 30-45, ≥45 years), BMI (<25.0, 25.0-29.9, ≥30.0), and preoperative symptom duration (<1 vs ≥1 year). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS). Pre- to postoperative improvement in mHHS and NAHS was compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal-Wallis test. Hip survivorship rates and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement rates were compared with Fisher exact test. Predictors of outcomes were identified using multivariable linear and logistic regression. P values <.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

In total, 103 patients were included in the analysis with a mean age of 42.0 ± 12.6 years (range, 16-75) and mean BMI of 24.9 ± 4.8 (range, 17.2-38.9). Most patients had symptoms of duration ≥1 year (60.2%). Six patients (5.8%) had arthroscopic revisions, and 2 patients (1.9%) converted to total hip arthroplasty by 5-year follow-up. Patients with BMI ≥30.0 had significantly lower postoperative mHHS (P = .03) and NAHS (P = .04) than those with BMI <25.0. Higher BMI was associated with reduced improvement in mHHS (β = -1.14, P = .02) and NAHS (β = -1.34, P < .001) and lower odds of achieving the mHHS MCID (odds ratio [OR] = 0.82, P = .02) and NAHS MCID (OR = 0.88, P = .04). Older age was predictive of reduced improvement in NAHS (β = -0.31, P = .046). Symptom duration ≥1 year was predictive of higher odds of achieving the NAHS MCID (OR = 3.98, P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Female patients across a wide range of ages, BMIs, and symptom durations experience satisfactory 5-year outcomes following primary hip arthroscopy, but higher BMI is associated with reduced improvement in patient-reported outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative prognostic trial.

Global Acetabular Retroversion Is Not Associated With Differences in Outcomes After Primary Hip Arthroscopy Among Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Matched Cohort Study With Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To compare hip survivorship and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after primary hip arthroscopy at 5-year follow-up between patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) with radiographic signs of global acetabular retroversion and those without.

METHODS

A retrospective matched-cohort study was conducted using a single-surgeon hip arthroscopy database. Patients were included if they underwent primary hip arthroscopy for treatment of FAIS, had preoperative hip x-rays, and had a minimum 5-year follow-up. Global retroversion was defined as the presence of ischial spine sign, posterior wall sign, and crossover sign on anteroposterior view. Patients with FAIS with global retroversion were matched 1:1 on age, sex, and body mass index to FAIS controls. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS) were administered preoperatively and at follow-up. Hip survivorship and PROMs were compared between the 2 groups using the paired t test, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and/or Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test as appropriate. P values <.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients with global retroversion (mean age 40.6 ± 10.8 years, 60.5% female) were matched to 38 controls (mean age 41.3 ± 13.6 years, 60.5% female). Reoperation rates were the same in both groups (5.3%). On average, both groups reported significant pre- to postoperative improvement in mHHS (P < .001) and NAHS (P < .001), and there was no significant intergroup differences in the change in mHHS (P = .86) or NAHS (P = .90). Achievement rates for the patient acceptable symptom state on the mHHS were higher among males compared to females (P = .04) in both the global retroversion group (93.3% vs 73.9%) and the control group (93.3% vs 73.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with FAIS with and without global acetabular retroversion had no significant difference in outcomes after primary hip arthroscopy at a minimum 5-year minimum follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative prognostic trial.

Defining hip cartilage repair: a modified delphi study to establish the Magnetic Resonance Evaluation of the Repair of Cartilage in the Hip (MERCH) score

PURPOSE

To develop a standardized scoring system to evaluate pre- to post-operative repair or reconstruction of hip cartilage using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

A two-phase modified Delphi study was conducted. Phase 1 involved a survey with suggested criteria and diagrams to define various stages of articular cartilage repair and phase 2 involved an expert consensus meeting that discussed the survey responses and voted on final scoring criteria. The survey was emailed to members of the Canadian Hip Preservation Research Collaborative (CHIPR) and respondents included both board certified orthopedic surgeons as well as musculoskeletal radiologists.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 17 survey respondents from Canada and most (47%, 8/17) participants agreed that the minimum MRI protocol needed to evaluate cartilage repair was a 3.0 T MRI and 94% (17/18) agreed that the minimum time post-operatively that they felt they would be able to accurately evaluate cartilage repair on an MRI was 12 months. Following phases 1 and 2, the final Magnetic Resonance Evaluation of the Repair of Cartilage in the Hip (MERCH) score was developed with 7 domains, 3 criteria per domain: 1) volume fill of cartilage defect, 2) integration into adjacent cartilage, 3) surface of the repair tissue, 4) structure of the repair tissue, 5) bony overgrowth, 6) subchondral changes, and 7) delamination. The score ranges from 60 (optimal) to -20 points (worst/none).

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus project established a new MRI scoring system to evaluate post-operative cartilage restoration of the hip. The implementation of the MERCH score is essential in our ability to guide patient management and expectations in a rapidly evolving field and will help with standardizing our evaluation of cartilage repair in future research trials.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II Diagnostic.

Cam morphology is strongly and consistently associated with development of radiographic hip osteoarthritis throughout 4 follow-up visits within 10 years

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between cam morphology and the development of radiographic hip osteoarthritis (RHOA) at four time points within 10-year follow-up.

DESIGN

The nationwide prospective Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee study includes 1002 participants aged 45-65 years with 2-, 5-, 8-, and 10-year follow-ups. The associations of cam morphology (alpha angle >60°) and large cam morphology (alpha angle >78°) in hips free of osteoarthritis at baseline (Kellgren & Lawrence (KL) grade <2) with the development of both incident RHOA (KL grade≥2) and end-stage RHOA (KL grade≥3) were estimated using logistic regression with generalized estimating equation at each follow-up and using Cox regression over 10 years, adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index.

RESULTS

Both cam morphology and large cam morphology were associated with the development of incident RHOA at all follow-ups with adjusted Odd Ratios (aORs) ranging from 2.7 (95% Confidence interval 1.8-4.1) to 2.9 (95% CI 2.0-4.4) for cam morphology and ranging from 2.5 (95% CI 1.5-4.3) to 4.2 (95% CI 2.2-8.3) for large cam morphology. For end-stage RHOA, cam morphology resulted in aORs ranging from 4.9 (95% CI 1.8-13.2) to 8.5 (95% CI 1.1-64.4), and aORs for large cam morphology ranged from 6.7 (95% CI 3.1-14.7) to 12.7 (95% CI 1.9-84.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Cam morphology poses the hip at 2-13 times increased odds for developing RHOA within a 10-year follow-up. The association was particularly strong for large cam morphology and end-stage RHOA, while the strength of association was consistent over time.

Hip Pain and Movement Dysfunction Associated With Nonarthritic Hip Joint Pain: A Revision

The Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy (AOPT), formerly the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). This is an update to the 2014 Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for Hip Pain and Movement Dysfunction Associated with Nonarthritic Hip Joint Pain. The goals of the revision were to provide a concise summary of the contemporary evidence since publication of the original guideline and to develop new recommendations or revise previously published recommendations to support evidence-based practice. This current CPG covers pathoanatomical features, clinical course, prognosis, diagnosis, examination, and physical therapy interventions in the management of nonarthritic hip joint pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(7):CPG1-CPG70. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.0302.