Two-Year Outcomes of Primary Arthroscopic Surgery in Patients with Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Comparative Study of Labral Repair and Labral Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Labral repair has become the preferred method for the arthroscopic treatment of acetabular labral tears that are associated with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) resulting in pain and dysfunction. Labral reconstruction is performed mainly in revision hip arthroscopy but can be utilized in the primary setting for absent or calcified labra. The purpose of this study was to compare the minimum 2-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and risk of revision or conversion to arthroplasty between primary labral reconstruction and primary labral repair. METHODS: Patients with FAI who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with labral repair or reconstruction performed by the senior author between 2006 and 2018 were identified from a prospectively enrolled patient outcome registry. Exclusion criteria included confounding injuries, dysplasia, prior ipsilateral hip surgery, or a joint space of <2 mm. Patients who were 18 to 80 years old were eligible for inclusion. Multiple regression with inverse propensity score weighting was conducted to estimate the average treatment effect in the treated (ATT) for labral reconstruction versus labral repair with respect to postoperative PROs and the likelihood of subsequent surgery (revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to arthroplasty). PRO end points included the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL), modified Harris hip score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index total score (WOMAC), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary score (SF-12 PCS), and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 150 hips undergoing primary labral reconstruction and 998 hips undergoing primary labral repair were included. The median follow-up time was 5.3 years in the reconstruction group and 5.8 years in the repair group. Compared with labral repair, labral reconstruction was associated with a higher risk of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) (20% versus 7%; adjusted odds ratio, 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 to 8.8; p = 0.024). Inverse propensity score-weighted multiple regression estimated a significant negative effect of labral reconstruction, relative to labral repair, on the postoperative values for the HOS-ADL (ATT, -3.3; 95% CI, -5.8 to -0.7; p = 0.012) and WOMAC (ATT, 2.6; 95% CI, 0.1 to 5.2; p = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with primary labral reconstruction, primary labral repair resulted in better postoperative HOS-ADL and WOMAC values and decreased conversion to THA. These findings were demonstrated in both the unadjusted group comparisons and multivariable modeling. These data support the use of labral repair in the primary setting of labral tears and the reservation of labral reconstruction for more advanced labral pathology or for revision cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Postoperative Radiographic Outcomes Following Primary Open Coracoid Transfer (Bristow-Latarjet) Vary in Definition, Classification, and Imaging Modality: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To analyze radiographic outcomes by conventional radiography, computed tomography (CT), or both and complication rates of open coracoid transfer at a minimum of 12-months follow-up. METHODS: A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, using PubMed, Medline (Ovid), and EMBASE library databases. Inclusion criteria were clinical studies reporting on open Latarjet as the primary surgical procedure(revision coracoid transfer after failed prior stabilization excluded) with postoperative radiographic outcomes at a minimum mean 1-year follow-up. Patient demographics, type of postoperative imaging modality, and radiographic outcomes and complications including graft union, osteoarthritis, and osteolysis were systematically reviewed. Data were summarized as ranges of reported values for each outcome metric. Each radiographic outcome was graphically represented in a Forest plot with point estimates of the incidence of radiographic outcomes with corresponding 95% confidence intervals and I2. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies met inclusion criteria, with a total of 1,456 shoulders. The most common postoperative imaging modality was plain radiography only (n = 848 [58.2%]), both CT and radiography (n = 287 [19.7%]), and CT only (n = 321 [22.1%]). Overall, the reported graft union rate ranged from 75% to 100%, of which 79.8% (n = 395) were detected on plain radiography. The most common reported postoperative radiographic complications after the open coracoid transfer were osteoarthritis (range, 0%-100%, pooled mean 28%), graft osteolysis (range, 0%-100%, pooled mean 30%), nonunion (range, 0%-32%, pooled mean 5.1%), malpositioned graft (range, 0%-75%, pooled mean 14.75%), hardware issues (range, 0%-9.1%, pooled mean 5%), and bone block fracture (range, 0%-8%, pooled mean 2.1%). Graft healing was achieved in a majority of cases (range, 75%-100%). CONCLUSION: Postoperative radiographic outcomes after open coracoid transfer vary greatly in definition, classification, and imaging modality of choice. Greater consistency in postoperative radiographic outcomes is essential to evaluate graft healing, osteolysis, and nonunion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III-IV studies.

Improved Mental Health Status and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is often a chronic problem, which can lead to a decrease in mental well-being. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to determine patient mental health improvement after hip arthroscopy and if this improvement correlated with improved outcomes. It was hypothesized that patients with low mental health (LMH) status would improve after hip arthroscopy for FAI and that their patient-reported outcomes (PROs) would significantly improve after surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy with labral repair between 2008 and 2015 were included. The minimum follow-up was 2 years. PROs included the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), HOS-Sports (HOS-Sports), and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). The minimal clinically important difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were determined for HOS-ADL, HOS-Sports, and the mHHS based on previously published studies. Patients who scored <46.5 on the SF-12 Mental Component Summary (MCS) were in the LMH group, and those who scored ≥46.5 were in the high mental health (HMH) group. RESULTS: In total, 120 (21%) of the 566 patients were in the LMH group and 446 (79%) patients were in the HMH group preoperatively. There was no difference in age or sex between groups. Patients in the LMH group had lower mHHS, HOS-ADL, and HOS-Sports at the mean 4-year follow-up and were less likely to reach PASS for the scores. Postoperatively, 84% (478/566) of the entire group was in the HMH group. A total of 88 (73%) of the LMH group improved to HMH. A multiple linear regression model for change in MCS identified independent predictors of changes in preoperative MCS to be LMH group preoperatively, change in HOS-Sports, and change in mHHS (r2 = 0.4; P < .001). CONCLUSION: HMH was achieved in 84% of the patients after hip arthroscopy for FAI. Improvement in MCS was correlated with function and activity, as indicated by a significant correlation with HOS-ADL and HOS-Sports. A small percentage of patients did see a decline in their MCS score. This study showed that patients with LMH scores before hip arthroscopy for FAI can improve to normal/high mental health, and this correlated with higher PROs.

Outcomes for Treatment of Capsulolabral Adhesions With a Capsular Spacer During Revision Hip Arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: The presence of adhesions is a common source of pain and dysfunction after hip arthroscopic surgery and an indication for revision surgery. The placement of a capsular spacer in the capsulolabral recess after lysis of adhesions has been developed to treat and prevent the recurrence of adhesions. PURPOSE: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship at a minimum of 2 years after revision hip arthroscopic surgery with capsular spacer placement for capsular adhesions. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Between January 2013 and June 2018, a total of 95 patients (99 hips) aged ≥18 years underwent revision hip arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of capsular adhesions with the placement of a capsular spacer. Overall, 53 patients (56 hips) met the inclusion criteria and had a minimum 2-year follow-up, forming the cohort of this study. Exclusion criteria included confounding metabolic bone diseases (eg, Legg-Calve-Perthes disease, Marfan syndrome), labral deficiency, or advanced osteoarthritis (Tönnis grade 2 or 3). Preoperative and postoperative outcome scores (modified Harris Hip Score [mHHS], Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living [HOS-ADL], Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale [HOS-SSS], 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12], and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]) were collected and compared in addition to the revision rate, conversion to total hip arthroplasty, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The mean age of the cohort was 32 ± 11 years, with 32 female hips (57%) and a median number of previous hip arthroscopic procedures of 1 (range, 1-5). The arthroplasty- and revision-free survivorship rate at 2 years was 91%. Overall, 5 patients (6 hips; 11%) underwent revision surgery at a mean of 2.4 ± 1.4 years after capsular spacer placement, with symptomatic capsular defects being the most common finding. There were 4 patients (7%) who converted to total hip arthroplasty. For hips not requiring subsequent surgery (n = 46), there was a significant improvement in outcome scores except for the SF-12 Mental Component Summary, with rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference of 70%, 70%, and 65% for the mHHS, HOS-ADL, and HOS-SSS, respectively. CONCLUSION: Capsular spacers, as part of a systematic approach including lysis of adhesions with early and consistent postoperative physical therapy including circumduction exercises, resulted in improved PROs as well as high arthroplasty- and revision-free survivorship (91%) at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Capsular spacers should be considered in revision hip arthroscopic procedures when an adequate labral volume remains but adhesions continue to be a concern.

Capsulolabral Adhesions After Hip Arthroscopy for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement: Strategies During Rehabilitation and Return to Sport to Reduce the Risk of Revision.

This article will review various strategies such as passive range of motion modalities, active range of motion movements, and pharmacological interventions for the prevention of adhesion formation after hip arthroscopy. Capsulolabral adhesions are a common cause of revision hip arthroscopy for which treatment methods are still evolving. Efforts to prevent and limit their formation postoperatively, including adjuncts such as losartan, as well as the use of consistent passive and active, multiplanar movements, both therapist and continuous passive motion machine assisted, should be considered.

Cotyloid Fossa Coverage Percentages May Be Associated With Alpha Angle, Labral Tear, and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement.

BACKGROUND: Within the hip joint, the anatomy of the acetabulum and cotyloid fossa is well established. There is little literature describing the association between the size of the cotyloid fossa relative to the acetabulum and characteristics of patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to calculate the cotyloid fossa coverage percentage in the acetabulum and determine its association with patient characteristics, radiographic parameters, intra-articular findings, and preoperative patient-reported outcomes in patients with FAI. We hypothesized there is an association between the cotyloid fossa coverage percentage of the acetabulum and characteristics of patients with FAI. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients were included who underwent standard clinical 3-T magnetic resonance imaging of the hip and primary arthroscopic FAI correction surgery during 2015 and 2016. Exclusion criteria were age <18 or >40 years, osteoarthritis, labral reconstruction, previous ipsilateral hip surgery, and hip dysplasia. Measurements of the cotyloid fossa and surrounding lunate cartilage were performed to calculate cotyloid fossa width (CFW) and cotyloid fossa height (CFH) coverage percentages. The relationships between coverage percentages and patient characteristics and intraoperative findings were assessed using independent t tests or Pearson correlations. RESULTS: An overall 146 patients were included. Alpha angle negatively correlated with CFH coverage percentage (r = -0.19; P = .03) and positively correlated with labral tear size (r = 0.28; P < .01). CFH coverage percentage was negatively correlated with labral tear size (r = -0.24; P < .01). Among patients with degenerative tears, CFH was negatively correlated with labral tear size (r = -0.31; P < .01). However, this association was no longer significant after adjusting for sex (partial r = -0.10; P = .39). Cotyloid fossa coverage was not associated with the condition of the cotyloid fossa synovium (synovitis vs no synovitis). CFW coverage percentage was negatively correlated with the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) physical component summary score (r = -0.23; P < .01). CONCLUSION: The CFW and CFH coverage percentages may be associated with alpha angle, labral tear size, and SF-12 physical component summary score in patients with FAI. We may be able to predict the labral condition based on preoperative measurements of CFH and CFW coverage percentages.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Patients With and Without Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Based on previous studies, it is difficult to discern whether patients who have femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH) would benefit from arthroscopy when compared with patients without BDDH. PURPOSE: To evaluate the existing comparative literature on arthroscopic findings, procedures, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and failures in patients who have FAI with BDDH compared with those without BDDH. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Ovid databases were searched for studies published up to August 31, 2019, that reported outcomes after arthroscopy to treat patients who had FAI with BDDH. Included studies were required to have patients diagnosed with FAI and BDDH who were treated arthroscopically and compared with control patients (FAI without BDDH). Arthroscopic findings, PROs, and revision or total hip arthroplasty (THA) conversion rates were compared between groups. RESULTS: Included in the review were 4 articles (933 patients). Patients who had FAI with BDDH were defined as having a lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) of either 18° to 25° or 20° to 25°; for control patients, the maximum LCEA was 40°. Across the studies, there were 224 patients who had FAI with BDDH compared with 709 control patients; the mean follow-up time ranged from 21.6 to 31.3 months among the groups. Improvements were shown across all PROs in each study. Random-effects meta-analysis indicated no statistically significant differences in postoperative PROs, the risk for revision surgery, or conversion to THA between the patients who had FAI with versus without BDDH. CONCLUSION: The results of the current review indicated that hip arthroscopy produced similar short-term outcomes between patients who had FAI with versus without BDDH.

Comparison Between Hip Arthroscopic Surgery and Periacetabular Osteotomy for the Treatment of Patients With Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The treatment for borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH) has historically been arthroscopic surgery or periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). As orthopaedic surgery is constantly evolving, a lack of comparison of outcomes for these 2 treatment methods could potentially be stalling the progression of treatment for patients with BDDH. PURPOSE: To evaluate the existing literature on patient characteristics, procedures, clinical outcomes, and failure rates for patients with BDDH and to determine whether PAO or hip arthroscopic surgery is a better treatment method for patients with BDDH. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Studies included were found using the following search words: "hip" and "borderline dysplasia," "osteotomy" or "arthroscopy," and "outcome" or "procedure." Articles were included if they detailed participants of all sexes and ages, reported on isolated hips, and had patients diagnosed with BDDH. RESULTS: A search was conducted across 3 databases, resulting in 469 articles for consideration, from which 12 total studies (10 on arthroscopic surgery and 2 on PAO) were chosen for a review. There were 6 studies that included patients with a lateral center-edge angle of 18° to 25°, while the remainder included patients with a lateral center-edge angle of 20° to 25°. All the studies reviewing arthroscopic surgery reported concomitant/accessory procedures, while the articles on the topic of PAO did not. It was determined that, whether treated using arthroscopic surgery or PAO, outcomes improved across all patient-reported outcome measures. Revision surgery was also common in both procedures. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of consensus in the literature on the best treatment option for patients with BDDH. Preoperative patient characteristics and concomitant injuries should be considered when evaluating which surgical procedure will result in the most favorable outcomes.