Open and Endoscopic Gluteus Medius and/or Minimus Repair Achieves Clinical Success Regardless of Tear Grade: High-Grade Fatty Infiltration Portends Worse Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate minimum 2-year gluteus medius and/or minimus repair clinical success rates stratified by the 3-grade magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based classification (MRI grade) and to evaluate clinical success rates by the surgical approach used at each MRI grade and by the Goutallier-Fuchs (GF) classification. METHODS: A retrospective review identified patients who underwent primary endoscopic or open gluteus medius and/or minimus repair from 2012 to 2021 performed by a single surgeon. Preoperative MRI scans were classified using the MRI grade and GF classification. Patient-reported outcomes were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up. Cohort-specific minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state achievement was recorded. Rates of clinical success, defined as achievement of the 2-year minimal clinically important difference or patient acceptable symptom state with avoidance of revision surgery, were compared by MRI grade, by surgical approach at each MRI grade, and by GF classification. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (71 with MRI grade 1, 19 with grade 2, and 22 with grade 3) were included. MRI grade 1 patients underwent endoscopic repair (P < .001) more often than the other groups. The overall clinical success rate was 90%. Clinical success rates by MRI grade were 93% for grade 1, 95% for grade 2, and 77% for grade 3 (P = .087). Clinical success rates by the endoscopic and open surgical approaches used at each MRI grade were 93% versus 90% for grade 1 (P = .543), 91% versus 100% for grade 2 (P > .999), and 60% versus 92% for grade 3 (P = .135). GF grade 1 tears achieved a higher rate of clinical success than GF grade 4 tears (100% vs 71%, P = .030). CONCLUSIONS: Primary repair of gluteus medius and/or minimus tears resulted in clinical success in most patients irrespective of MRI grade and irrespective of the surgical approach used at each MRI grade, yet GF grade 1 tears showed a significantly higher clinical success rate than GF grade 4 tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic retrospective case series.

Outcome Scores and Survivorship of Patients Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy With Borderline Hip Dysplasia: A Propensity-Matched Study With Minimum 10-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) and concomitant femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) have demonstrated similar outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up compared with equivalent patients without dysplasia. However, comparisons between these groups at long-term follow-up have yet to be investigated. PURPOSE: To compare long-term clinical outcomes between patients with BHD undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS versus matched control patients without BHD. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with BHD (lateral center-edge angle, 18°-25°) who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS between January 2012 and February 2013. Patients were propensity matched in a 1:3 ratio by age, sex, and body mass index to control patients without BHD who underwent primary hip arthroscopy. Groups were compared in terms of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) preoperatively and at 10 years postoperatively, including the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) and Sports subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score, 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction. Achievement rates for minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were assessed between groups. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 10.3 ± 0.3 years, 28 patients with BHD (20 women; age, 30.8 ± 10.8 years) were matched to 84 controls who underwent primary hip arthroscopy. Both groups significantly improved from preoperative assessment in all PRO measures at 10 years (P < .001 for all). PRO scores were similar between groups, aside from HOS-SS (BHD, 62.9 ± 31.9 vs controls, 80.1 ± 26.0; P = .030). Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups for all PROs (HOS-ADL: BHD, 76.2% vs controls, 67.9%, P = .580; HOS-SS: BHD, 63.2% vs controls, 69.4%, P = .773; modified Harris Hip Score: BHD, 76.5% vs controls, 67.9%, P = .561; VAS pain: BHD, 75.0% vs controls, 91.7%, P = .110). Rates of PASS achievement were significantly lower in the BHD group for HOS-ADL (BHD, 39.1% vs controls, 77.4%; P = .002), HOS-SS (BHD, 45.5% vs controls, 84.7%; P = .001), and VAS pain (BHD, 50.0% vs controls, 78.5%; P = .015). No significant difference was found in the rate of subsequent reoperation on the index hip between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated comparable survivorship at long-term follow-up (P = .645). CONCLUSION: After primary hip arthroscopy, patients with BHD in the setting of FAIS had significantly improved PRO scores at 10-year follow-up, comparable with propensity-matched controls without BHD. Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups, although patients with BHD had lower rates of PASS achievement. Patients with BHD had similar long-term hip arthroscopy survivorship compared with controls, with no significant difference in rates of revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

Patients With Lateral and Anterolateral Cam Morphology Have Greater Deformities Versus Typical Anterolateral Deformity Alone but No Differences in Postoperative Outcomes: A Propensity-Matched Analysis at Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To compare pre- and postoperative findings between patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome with lateral impingement versus those without lateral impingement METHODS: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between 2012 and 2017 with minimum 5-year follow-up were included. Alpha angle (AA) was measured on preoperative anteroposterior (AP) and 90° Dunn radiographs. Patients with AA >60° on Dunn view but not AP view (no lateral impingement) were propensity matched by sex, age, and body mass index in a 1:3 ratio to patients with AA >60° on both views (lateral impingement). Demographic characteristics, radiographic and intraoperative findings, reoperation rates, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared between groups. Categorical variables were compared using the Fisher exact testing and continuous variable using 2-tailed Student t tests. RESULTS: Sixty patients with lateral impingement (65.0% female, age: 35.3 ± 13.0 years) were matched to 180 patients without lateral impingement (65.0% female, age: 34.7 ± 12.5 years, P ≥ .279). Patients with lateral impingement had larger preoperative AAs on both Dunn (71.0° ± 8.8° vs 67.6° ± 6.1°, P = .001) and AP radiographs (79.0° ± 12.1° vs 48.2° ± 6.5°, P < .001). However, there were no differences in postoperative AAs on either view (Dunn: 39.0° ± 6.1° vs 40.5° ± 5.3°, AP: 45.8° ± 9.0° vs 44.9° ± 7.0°, P ≥ .074). Labral tears began more superiorly in patients with lateral impingement (12:00 ± 0:49 vs 12:17 ± 0:41, P = .030), and they demonstrated greater rates of acetabular and femoral cartilage damage (P = .030 for both); however, there were no differences in PROs or reoperation rates between the groups at 5-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although cam deformities located laterally and anterolaterally are larger than those located anterolaterally alone, both can be resected adequately, resulting in similar postoperative radiographic measurements, PROs, and survivorship. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Labral Augmentation With Either Iliotibial Band Allograft or Dermis Allograft Perform Similarly Regarding Peak Force, Displacement, and Work to Labral Repair in Suction Seal Restoration: A Biomechanical Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether allograft substitutes may be used to restore suctional seal properties with labral augmentation, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of the labral suction seal under several scenarios, including: (1) intact labrum, (2) rim preparation, (3) labral repair, (4) labral augmentation with iliotibial band (ITB), and (5) labral augmentation with a dermis allograft. METHODS: Eleven hemi-pelvises were dissected to the level of the labrum and placed in a material testing system for biomechanical axial distraction. Each specimen was compressed to 250 newtons (N) and distracted at 10 mm/s while load, crosshead displacement, and time were continuously recorded. For each of the 5 labral states, 3 testing repetitions were performed. Peak force (N, newtons), displacement at peak force (mm, millimeter), and work (N-mm, newton, millimeter) were calculated and normalized to the intact state of each specimen. RESULTS: Eleven specimens were tested and 8 specimens (age: 58.6 ± 5.4 years, body mass index: 28.6 ± 6.8 kg/m2; 4 female patients; 5 right hips) were included in final analyses. Expressed as a percentage relative to the intact state, the average normalized peak force, displacement at peak force, and work for each labral state were as follows: intact (100.0% ± 0% for all), rim preparation (89.0% ± 9.2%, 93.3% ± 20.6%, 85.1% ± 9.0%), repair (61.3% ± 17.9%, 88.4% ± 36.9%, 58.1% ± 16.7%), ITB allograft (62.7% ± 24.9%, 83.9% ± 21.6%, 59.4% ± 22.4%), and dermis allograft (57.8% ± 27.2%, 88.2% ± 29.5%, 50.0% ± 20.1%). Regarding peak force, intact state was significantly greater compared with the labral repair, augmentation with ITB, and augmentation with the dermis allograft states (P < .001). No significant differences were demonstrated between displacement at peak force (P = .561). Regarding work, both intact state and rim preparation states were significantly greater than the repair, ITB augmentation, and dermis allograft augmentation states (P < .001). In all outcome measures, the dermis allograft augmentation performed with no statistical difference to the ITB augmentation state. CONCLUSIONS: Labral repair and labral augmentation with either ITB allograft or the dermis allograft resulted in significantly lower peak force and work to equilibrium compared with the intact and rim prep states. There was no statistical difference between repair and augmentation states as well as no statistical difference between ITB allograft and dermal allograft at time zero. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study compares biomechanical properties of the suction seal of the hip comparing labral states including intact, rim preparation, repair, and augmentation, which can be used for surgical decision-making.

The Promising 2-Year Performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System in Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds have been previously defined for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) at 1-year follow-up in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome; however, the MCID and PASS thresholds are yet to be defined for the PROMIS at 2-year follow-up. PURPOSE: (1) To establish MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) and PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) at 2-year follow-up and (2) to correlate PROMIS scores with hip-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between August and November 2020 with preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative data were identified. Collected scores included those for the PROMIS-PI, PROMIS-PF, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. MCID thresholds were calculated using the distribution-based method and PASS thresholds using the anchor-based method. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compare scores between PROMs. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients met the criteria for inclusion (72.3% female; mean age, 36.9 ± 13.5 years; mean body mass index, 26.2 ± 6.0). The mean follow-up was 25.3 ± 3.3 months. Significant preoperative to postoperative improvements were observed for all PROMs (P < .001). MCID thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 10.1 and 75%, respectively; HOS-SS, 13.8 and 79%, respectively; iHOT-12, 14.0 and 67%, respectively; VAS pain, -13.8 and 78%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, -4.7 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 5.8 and 60%, respectively. PASS thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 78.7 and 67%, respectively; HOS-SS, 76.4 and 62%, respectively; iHOT-12, 67.4 and 60%, respectively; VAS pain, 25.5 and 61%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, 57.0 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 45.6 and 58%, respectively. PROMIS-PI scores correlated most strongly with HOS-ADL (r = -0.836), HOS-SS (r = -0.767), and iHOT-12 (r = -0.719) scores and exhibited at least moderate correlations (r≥-0.595) with the other PROM scores. PROMIS-PF demonstrated moderate correlations with all the other PROM scores (r≥-0.586). Strong correlations were seen between the hip-specific PROM scores (r≥-0.745). CONCLUSION: This study defined 2-year MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PF and demonstrated moderate to strong correlations between PROMIS scores and hip-specific PROM scores.

Outcomes of Isolated Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair Compared With Concomitant Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair and Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair: A Propensity-Matched Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

Background: Both gluteal and labral tears are common sources of hip pain, but no studies have evaluated how concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) affect outcomes after endoscopic gluteus/minimus repair. Purpose: (1) To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinically significant outcomes achievements between patients who underwent endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus and arthroscopic hip labral repair with correction of FAIS versus endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair and (2) to define threshold scores required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool, and visual analog scale for pain in these patients. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent primary endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair between 2012 and 2020 were identified. Those who underwent concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of FAIS with femoroplasty or acetabuloplasty as indicated were propensity matched in a 1 to 1 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index to patients who underwent gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair. Patients who completed the study PROs were assessed preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Threshold scores required to achieve the MCID and PASS thresholds were calculated. Results: A total of 32 patients who underwent simultaneous gluteal and labral repair (G+L) were matched to 32 patients who underwent gluteal repair without labral repair (G); 75% of patients in the G cohort underwent labral debridement, while 25% in this cohort received no labral treatment. A significant difference was observed between groups in preoperative mHHS scores (G+L, 54.4 ± 12.9 vs G, 46.3 ± 14; P = .048) but no differences in any other PRO scores (P≥ .207). The MCID/PASS thresholds were as follows: Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (11.14/83.82), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (16.07/59.72), mHHS (11.47/70.95), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (13.73/45.49), and visual analog scale for pain (14.30/22). There were no significant differences in MCID or PASS achievement rates between the 2 groups (P≥ .108). Conclusion: Patients who underwent combined G+L demonstrated comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes achievement rates to patients who underwent G, highlighting sustained successful outcomes for patients with gluteal tendon pathology and concomitant FAIS and labral tears.

Functional Outcome Scores and Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome in Patients With Tönnis Grade 1 Versus Grade 0 Arthritis: A Propensity-Matched Study at Minimum 10-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy has become the mainstay surgical intervention for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). However, postoperative outcomes and rates of secondary surgery are mixed in patients with differing levels of preoperative osteoarthritis (OA). Furthermore, there is a paucity of literature comparing patients with and without OA at long-term follow-up. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes and rates of secondary surgery at minimum 10-year follow-up, including revision hip arthroscopy and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), in patients with Tönnis grade 1 undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS compared with a propensity-matched control group of patients with Tönnis grade 0. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS between January 2012 and February 2013 were identified. Patients with Tönnis grade 1 were propensity matched in a 1:2 ratio by age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) to patients with Tönnis grade 0. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected at varying timepoints including preoperatively and 1, 2, 5, and 10 years postoperatively and compared between the 2 cohorts. Rates of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) achievement at 10 years were evaluated and compared between groups. Rates of secondary surgery including revision hip arthroscopy and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) were evaluated. Gross survivorship between cohorts was evaluated using a Kaplan-Meier gross survivorship curve. A subanalysis was performed comparing patients with Tönnis grade 1 who converted to THA and those who did not. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients with Tönnis grade 1 (age, 42.6 ± 9.0 years; BMI, 28.0 ± 6.3) were successfully matched to 62 patients with Tönnis grade 0 (age, 42.1 ± 8.5, P = .805; BMI, 26.1 ± 3.9, P = .117). Both the Tönnis grade 1 and Tönnis grade 0 groups demonstrated significant improvements regarding all PROs at minimum 10 years (P < .05 for all), except for the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) (P = .066) in the Tönnis grade 1 cohort. No significant difference (P > .05 for all) was noted between cohorts regarding any 10-year PRO. When the authors evaluated comparisons between preoperative and 1-, 2-, 5-, and 10-year PRO measures, significant differences were noted between cohorts regarding 2-year HOS-ADL (P = .021), Hip Outcome Score Sports-Specific subscale (P = .016), and modified Harris Hip Score (P = .026); otherwise, differences did not reach significance. High rates of 10-year MCID and PASS achievement were seen, with no significant differences between groups. Patients with Tönnis grade 1 had significantly higher rates of conversion to THA compared with patients who had Tönnis grade 0 (25.8% vs 4.8%; P = .006). Patients with Tönnis grade 1 had significantly lower gross survivorship compared with those who had Tönnis grade 0 (71.0% vs 85.5%, respectively; P = .04). CONCLUSION: Hip arthroscopy confers comparable postoperative clinical improvements to patients who have FAIS with and without mild OA; however, the benefits among patients with mild OA may be less durable. Patients with Tönnis grade 1 had significantly higher conversion to THA and reduced gross survivorship compared with patients with no evidence of preoperative OA, suggesting that patients with evidence of OA may need to be cautioned on the higher rate of conversion surgery.

Hip Arthroscopic Surgery With Chondrolabral Refixation, Osteochondroplasty, and Routine Capsular Closure for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: Clinical Outcomes at a Minimum 10-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) has proven to be an effective surgical intervention, with high rates of return to sport and work as well as favorable outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up. However, limited data exist on outcomes at long-term follow-up. PURPOSE: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at a minimum 10-year follow-up after primary hip arthroscopic surgery including labral repair, femoral osteochondroplasty, acetabular osteochondroplasty, and capsular closure for FAIS. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS between June 2012 and January 2013 were identified. PROs were collected preoperatively and at a minimum of 10 years postoperatively, including the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction. Unique minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds were calculated, and their rates of achievement were analyzed. An alpha level of <.05 was used to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients (55 female; mean age, 34.3 ± 12.4 years) were analyzed with a mean follow-up of 10.1 ± 0.3 years (range, 10.0-10.7 years). Patients demonstrated significant 10-year improvement across all PRO measures (P < .001). MCID and PASS thresholds were calculated as follows: HOS-ADL (10.4 and 85.3, respectively), HOS-SS (14.6 and 60.2, respectively), mHHS (8.8 and 76.0, respectively), VAS pain (14.6 and 27.5, respectively), and iHOT-12 (PASS: 71.4). The majority of patients achieved the MCID and PASS for each PRO measure: HOS-ADL (73.4% and 70.9%, respectively), HOS-SS (78.5% and 77.2%, respectively), mHHS (81.0% and 70.9%, respectively), VAS pain (88.6% and 70.9%, respectively), and iHOT-12 (PASS: 73.4%). Overall, 9 patients (9.6%) underwent subsequent revision hip arthroscopic surgery at a mean 4.9 ± 3.7 years (range, 1.1-10.1 years) postoperatively, and 6 patients (6.4%) underwent conversion to total hip arthroplasty at a mean 4.1 ± 3.1 years (range, 0.9-9.3 years) postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS utilizing contemporary methods of labral repair, acetabular and/or femoral osteochondroplasty, and capsular closure commonly experienced sustained clinical improvement and reported high levels of satisfaction at a minimum 10-year follow-up with low rates of reoperation.

Patients Undergoing Revision Hip Arthroscopy Demonstrate Comparable Survivability and Improvement but Worse Postoperative Outcomes Compared to Patients Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Propensity Matched Study at Five-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To compare mid-term clinical outcomes between patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy (HA) versus revision hip arthroscopy (RHA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 1,862 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS from January 2012 to April 2017. Patients who underwent RHA were propensity matched in a 1:4 ratio by age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and exercise status to patients who underwent primary HA. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes before and at 5 years after surgery, including the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) and Sports subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain and Satisfaction, were compared between groups. Minimally clinically important difference and patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) achievement rates were compared using previously published thresholds. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients who underwent RHA (35 female, 16 male; age 36.2 ± 10.2 years; BMI 26.5 ± 5.9) were followed up for 63.9 ± 9.2 months and then propensity matched in a 1:4 ratio by sex, age, and BMI to 204 control patients who underwent primary HA. At midterm follow-up, patients in the RHA cohort had significantly lower scores for HOS-SS (RHA 64.9 ± 32.5 vs HA 75.3 ± 26.2, P = .044), mHHS (RHA 72.2 ± 22.4 vs HA 80.1 ± 18.1, P = .039), and iHOT-12 (RHA 61.4 ± 29.3 vs HA 71 ± 27.6, P = .043) compared to primary HA patients. Rates of achieving PASS were significantly decreased for HOS-SS (RHA 38.3% vs HA 55.4%, P = .039) and iHOT-12 (RHA 41.9% vs HA 59.9%, P = .035) in the RHA cohort. There were no significant differences in rates of conversion to THA or subsequent reoperation on the index hip between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy demonstrate comparable survivability and magnitude of improvement but may experience worse overall outcome scores and meet thresholds for clinically significant outcomes less often when compared to primary hip arthroscopy patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; retrospective comparative study.

The Gluteus-Score-7 Predicts the Likelihood of Both Clinical Success and Failure Following Surgical Repair of the Hip Gluteus Medius and/or Minimus.

PURPOSE: To identify patient preoperative history, examination, and imaging characteristics that increase the risk of postoperative failure of gluteus medius/minimus repair, and to develop a decision-making aid predictive of clinical outcomes for patients undergoing gluteus medius/minimus repair. METHODS: Patients from 2012 to 2020 at a single institution undergoing gluteus medius/minimus repair with minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. MRIs were graded according to the "three-grade" classification system: grade 1: partial-thickness tear, grade 2: full-thickness tears with <2 cm of retraction, grade 3: full-thickness tears with ≥2 cm retraction. Failure was defined as undergoing revision within 2 years postoperatively or not achieving both a cohort-calculated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and responding "no" to patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). Inversely, success was defined as reaching both an MCID and responding "yes" to PASS. Predictors of failure were verified on logistic regression and a predictive scoring model, the Gluteus-Score-7, was generated to guide treatment-decision making. RESULTS: In total, 30 of 142 patients (21.1%) were clinical failures at mean ± SD follow-up of 27.0 ± 5.2 months. Preoperative smoking (odds ratio [OR], 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-8.4; P = .041), lower back pain (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.3; P = .038), presence of a limp or Trendelenburg gait (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.5-10.2; P = .006), history of psychiatric diagnosis (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.3-10.8; P = .014), and increased MRI classification grades (P ≤ .042) were independent predictors of failure. The Gluteus-Score-7 was generated with each history/examination predictor assigned 1 point and MRI classes assigned corresponding 1-3 points (min 1, max 7 score). A score of ≥4/7 points was associated with risk of failure and a score ≤2/7 points was associated with clinical success. CONCLUSIONS: Independent risk factors for revision or not achieving either MCID or PASS after gluteus medius and/or minimus tendon repair include smoking, preoperative lower back pain, psychiatric history, Trendelenburg gait, and full-thickness tears, especially tears with ≥2 cm retraction. The Gluteus-Score-7 tool incorporating these factors can identify patients at risk of both surgical treatment failure and success, which may be useful for clinical decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic case series.

Workers' Compensation Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Experience Worse Mid-Term Outcomes but Similar Return-to-Work: A Propensity-Matched Analysis at 5-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To investigate mid-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and return-to-work for workers' compensation (WC) patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) versus propensity-matched, non-WC controls and to determine whether achievement rates of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) differ between these populations. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on WC patients who underwent primary HA for FAIS from 2012 to 2017. WC and non-WC patients were propensity matched on a 1:4 basis by sex, age, and body mass index (BMI). PROs were compared preoperatively and at 5 years postoperatively, employing the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Sports-Specific (HOS-SS) subscales, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and visual analog scales (VAS) for pain and satisfaction. MCID and PASS were calculated using published thresholds for these measures. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs and the presence and timing of return to unrestricted work were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-three WC patients were successfully matched to 172 non-WC controls and followed for 64.2 ± 7.7 months. WC patients demonstrated lower preoperative scores for all measures (P ≤ .031) and worse HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, and VAS pain scores at 5-year follow-up (P ≤ .021). There were no differences in MCID achievement rates or magnitude of change between preoperative and 5-year postoperative PROs (P ≥ .093); however, WC patients achieved PASS at lower rates for HOS-ADL and HOS-SS (P ≤ .009). 76.7% of WC and 84.3% of non-WC patients returned to work without restrictions (P = .302) at 7.4 ± 4.4 versus 5.0 ± 3.8 months, respectively (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: WC patients undergoing HA for FAIS report worse preoperative pain and function than non-WC patients and experience worse pain, function, and PASS achievement at 5-year follow-up. However, they demonstrate similar MCID achievement and magnitude improvement between preoperative and 5-year postoperative PROs, and return to work without restrictions at a similar rate to non-WC patients, although they may take longer to do so. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Results of Endoscopic Labral Repair With Concomitant Gluteus Medius and/or Minimus Repair Compared With Outcomes of Labral Repair Alone: A Matched Comparative Cohort Analysis at Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of information available to clinicians on outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic surgery for labral repairs and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome with simultaneous repair of the gluteus medius and/or minimus muscles. PURPOSE: To determine whether patients with labral tears and concomitant gluteal pathology who undergo simultaneous endoscopic labral and gluteus medius and/or minimus repair experience similar outcomes to patients with isolated labral tears who undergo endoscopic labral repair alone. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A matched retrospective comparative cohort study was performed. Patients who underwent gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant labral repair between January 2012 and November 2019 were identified. These patients were matched in a 1:3 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index (BMI) to patients who underwent labral repair alone. Preoperative radiographs were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. PRO measures included the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living and Sports subscales, modified Harris Hip Score, 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool, and visual analog scales for pain and satisfaction. Published labral repair minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds were utilized for these measures. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients who underwent gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant labral repair (27 female, 4 male; age, 50.8 ± 7.3 years; BMI, 27.9 ± 5.2) were matched with 93 patients who underwent labral repair alone (81 female, 12 male; age, 50.9 ± 8.1 years; BMI, 28.5 ± 6.2). There were no significant differences in sex (P > .99), age (P = .869), or BMI (P = .592); preoperative radiographic measurements; or preoperative or 2-year postoperative PRO scores (P≥ .081). Changes between preoperative and 2-year postoperative PRO scores were significantly different for both groups for all PROs assessed (P < .001 for all). There were no significant differences in MCID or PASS achievement rates (P≥ .123), with low PASS achievement rates of 40% to 60% found in both groups. CONCLUSION: Patients who were treated with endoscopic gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant labral repair demonstrated comparable outcomes with those who were treated with endoscopic labral repair alone.

Does synovial sarcoma grade predict oncologic outcomes, and does a low-grade variant exist?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: While historically aggressive, some synovial sarcomas (SS) are clinically indolent. This study sought to determine whether SS grade predicts oncologic outcomes and whether Grade 1 disease might exist. METHODS: Thirty-five cases from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinicopathological data were analyzed and Kaplan-Meier assessed survival. RESULTS: The median patient age was 37 years (interquartile range: 28-51.5). The local control rate was 74.3%, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) was worse in positive versus negative margin resections (p = 0.023). The incidence of metastasis was 21.9% (n = 7) at a median 31 ± 31.7 months, and metastasis-free survival was 50.0% in Grade 3 SS versus 86.5% in Grade 2 (p = 0.026). Among a theoretical Grade 1 group, the overall survival (OS) and RFS profiles were improved compared to Grade 2 and 3 SS, respectively (p = 0.014 and p = 0.030). The Grade 1 group had a 15.8% (n = 3) metastatic rate and 80% 10-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor grade appears to predict outcomes in SS. A theoretical Grade 1 group showed improved OS and RFS versus Grades 2 and 3 SS, with metastatic rates and long-term survival resembling the historical literature for other low-grade soft tissue sarcomas. Our group continues to support the French Federation of Cancer Centers diagnostic strategy and NCCN treatment guidelines for SS.

Return to Sport in Athletes With Borderline Hip Dysplasia After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Data on outcomes in patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) who undergo hip arthroscopy remain limited, particularly in regard to return to sport (RTS). PURPOSE: To evaluate outcomes in patients with BHD and their ability to RTS after hip arthroscopy for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Consecutive patients with self-reported athletic activity and radiographic evidence of BHD, characterized by a lateral femoral center-edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and 25° and a Tönnis angle >10°, who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS between November 2014 and March 2017 were identified. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes including the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction were analyzed at minimum 2-year follow-up. In addition, all patients completed an RTS survey. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients with a mean age and body mass index (BMI) of 29.6 ± 13.4 years and 25.3 ± 5.6, respectively, were included. Mean LCEA and Tönnis angle for the study population were 22.7°± 1.8° and 13.3°± 2.9°, respectively. A total of 31 (75.6%) patients were able to RTS after hip arthroscopy at a mean of 8.3 ± 3.2 months. A total of 14 patients (45.2%) were able to RTS at the same level of activity, 16 patients (51.6%) returned to a lower level of activity, and only 1 (3.2%) patient returned to a higher level of activity. Of the 11 high school and collegiate athletes, 10 (90.9%) were able to RTS. All patients demonstrated significant improvements in all patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as well as in pain scores at a mean of 26.1 ± 5.4 months after surgery. Patients who were able to RTS had a lower preoperative BMI than patients who did not RTS. Analysis of minimum 2-year PROMs demonstrated better HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, mHHS, iHOT-12, and VAS outcomes for pain in patients able to RTS versus those who did not RTS (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Of the patients with BHD studied here, 75.6% of patients successfully returned to sport at a mean of 8.3 ± 3.2 months after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. Of the patients who successfully returned to sport, 45.2% returned at the same level, and 3.2% returned at a higher activity level.

Travel Distance Does Not Affect Outcomes in Hip Preservation Surgery: A Case for Centers of Excellence.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have evaluated the effect of distance to high-volume centers on outcomes after joint replacement. However, there is limited evidence on whether this distance has an effect on outcomes after undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). PURPOSE: To determine whether increased distance from a patient's home to his or her primary orthopaedic clinic has an influence on the ability to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on outcome measures after surgery for FAIS. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on patients undergoing surgery for FAIS by a single surgeon from January 2012 through January 2017. A total of 692 patients were identified and split into 2 groups: driving distance of <50 miles from our institution (referral group) and driving distance of <50 miles from our institution (local group). Preoperative and 2-year postoperative scores on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living and Sport-Specific subscales, International Hip Outcome Tool-12, and modified Harris Hip Score, were assessed. Patients achieving the MCID on any included PROM were analyzed using a chi-square analysis. Logistic regression was performed to determine whether driving distance and other demographic variables of interest had an effect on achieving the MCID. Study data were analyzed using PatientIQ, a cloud-based research and analytics platform for health care. RESULTS: There were 647 patients who completed 2-year follow-up and were included in the analysis. Of these patients, 116 (17.9%) were identified as being ≥50 miles from their orthopaedic provider, and 531 (82.1%) were identified as having a driving distance of <50 miles. A total of 100 patients (86.2%) in the referral group reached the MCID, and 476 patients (89.6%) in the local group reached the MCID. There was no statistically significant difference in reaching the MCID on any of the included PROMs between the 2 groups (P = .364). The same result held when controlling for a number of factors including age, body mass index, and adjusted gross income with logistic regression. CONCLUSION: When controlling for a number of factors including age, body mass index, and adjusted gross income, distance to a high-volume hip arthroscopic surgery center did not have an effect on postoperative outcome scores or achieving the MCID 2 years after undergoing surgery for FAIS.

The Influence of Lumbosacral Spine Pathology on Minimum 2-Year Outcome After Hip Arthroscopy: A Nested Case-Control Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous literature has examined the association between lumbosacral pathology and hip pathomechanics. However, the effect of lumbosacral pathologies and previous lumbosacral surgery on achieving meaningful outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) has yet to be studied conclusively. PURPOSE: To determine whether a history of lumbosacral spine pathology has an influence on achieving minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS by a single, fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeon between January 2012 and April 2017 with minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with a history of lumbosacral spine pathology (eg, lumbosacral fusion, disc or vertebral pathology, or history of lumbosacral fractures) were matched 1:2 by age, body mass index, and sex to patients without spine pathology. Clinical outcomes including the Hip Outcome Score-activities of daily living subscale (HOS-ADL), HOS-sports subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), international Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), visual analog scale (VAS) pain, and VAS satisfaction were compared between the groups using an independent t test. The threshold of every outcome score for achieving MCID was calculated separately for each group and frequencies were compared. RESULTS: A total of 83 of 108 eligible patients with lumbosacral pathology were identified and matched to 166 patients without any spine pathology. When compared with the non-spine pathology group, the lumbosacral pathology group had significantly lower 2-year postoperative outcome score averages across all reported outcome tools (all P < .001). There were significant differences in the proportion achieving the threshold for HOS-ADL (60.6% vs 80.0%; P = .004), HOS-SS (57.6% vs 82.1%; P < .001), mHHS (66.7% vs 81.7%; P = .025), and iHOT-12 (54.8% vs 87.6%; P < .001) scores for MCID when comparing the lumbosacral and nonlumbosacral pathology groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with a history of lumbosacral pathology achieved significantly lower short-term meaningful clinical outcomes after undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS when compared with patients without spine pathology. The present study findings have implications for preoperative patient screening, shared decision-making processes/expectation management, and rehabilitation strategies.

A modified Harrington technique for periacetabular reconstruction in advanced metastatic bone disease and a discussion of alternative treatment options.

Management of periacetabular lesions involves complex clinical decision making. The modified Harrington procedure with total hip arthroplasty can recreate pelvic stability with a cement rebar construct as well as a functional hip. This study analyzes the modified Harrington procedure to assess construct longevity and patient outcomes. We queried a prospectively maintained database to identify all patients at a large academic medical center from 2017 to 2019 with periacetabular metastatic disease treated with a modified Harrington. Medical records were reviewed and complications, patient outcomes, Musculoskeletal Society Tumor (MSTS) scores, and implant survival were recorded. A total of nine patients were treated with the modified Harrington between 2017 and 2019. At maximum follow- up there were zero revisions or longterm complications. The mean preoperative MSTS score was 2.2 (range, 0-18), compared to the mean postoperative MSTS score of 17.7 (range, 9-25) recorded at a mean 4 (range, 1-30) months following surgery (p<0.001). The modified Harrington technique total hip technique for reconstruction in periacetabular metastatic bone disease is a safe procedure with effective symptom relief, improvement in function, and excellent implant survivorship.

Preoperative Performance of the PROMIS in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopic Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is being increasingly evaluated for use in orthopaedic surgery. The performance of the PROMIS in patients undergoing hip preservation surgery is unknown. PURPOSE: To investigate the psychometric performance of the PROMIS compared with legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients indicated for hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery between January and October 2018 for the treatment of FAIS were collected and analyzed. Baseline data, including preoperative PROM scores and demographics, were recorded. PROMs included the PROMIS Physical Function (PF), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), and the Veterans RAND 12-item health survey (VR-12). Pearson and Spearman coefficient analyses were used to identify correlations between continuous and noncontinuous variables, respectively. Correlation was defined as excellent (>0.80), very good (0.71-0.80), good (0.61-0.70), fair (0.41-0.60), or poor (0.21-0.40). A multivariate linear regression analysis was used to identify preoperative predictors of having higher preoperative PROMIS scores. RESULTS: A total of 197 patients with a mean age and body mass index (BMI) of 32.8 ± 12.6 years and 25.7 ± 5.6 kg/m2, respectively, were included in the final analysis. There were no ceiling or floor effects for the PROMIS PF score observed in the study group. With regard to hip-specific measures, PROMIS PF scores demonstrated excellent correlation with HOS-Activities of Daily Living (r = 0.801; P < .001) scores, very good correlation with mHHS (r = 0.721; P < .001) and iHOT-12 (r = 0.722; P < .001) scores, and good correlation with HOS-Sports Specific (r = 0.675; P < .001) scores. With regard to general health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures, PROMIS PF scores demonstrated very good correlation with VR-12 mental (r = 0.721; P < .001) scores, good correlation with VR-12 physical (r = 0.618; P < .001) scores, and poor correlation with visual analog scale for pain (r = -0.365; P < .001) scores. Patients who reported being physically active were more likely to have a higher preoperative PROMIS score (ß = 3.216; P = .004). Lower PROMIS scores were found in patients with a higher BMI (ß = -0.236; P = .005) and in female patients (ß = -2.608; P = .014). CONCLUSION: In patients with FAIS, the preoperative PROMIS PF scores demonstrated excellent to good correlation with legacy hip-specific instruments as well as with HRQoL measures. No ceiling or floor effects were identified. Notably, of the hip-specific PROMs administered, the PROMIS PF demonstrated the weakest correlation with the HOS-Sports Specific subscale. Physical activity, BMI, and sex were predictors of preoperative PROMIS scores in our patient population.