What Factors Predict Conversion to THA After Arthroscopy?

BACKGROUND: Failure of hip preservation to alleviate symptoms potentially subjects the patient to reoperation or conversion surgery to THA, adding recovery time, risk, and cost. A risk calculator using an algorithm that can predict the likelihood that a patient who undergoes arthroscopic hip surgery will undergo THA within 2 years would be helpful, but to our knowledge, no such tool exists. QUESTIONS: (1) Are there preoperative and intraoperative variables at the time of hip arthroscopy associated with subsequent conversion to THA? (2) Can these variables be used to develop a predictive tool for conversion to THA? MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing arthroscopy from January 2009 through December 2011 were registered in our longitudinal database. Inclusion criteria for the study group were patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for a labral tear, who eventually had conversion surgery to THA. Patients were compared with a control group of patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for a labral tear but who did not undergo conversion surgery to THA during the same study period. Of the 893 who underwent surgery during that time, 792 (88.7%) were available for followup at a minimum of 2 years (mean, 31.1 ± 8.1 years) and so were considered in this analysis. Multivariate regression analyses of 41 preoperative and intraoperative variables were performed. Using the results of the multivariate regression, we developed a simplified calculator that may be helpful in counseling a patient regarding the risk of conversion to THA after hip arthroscopy. RESULTS: Variables simultaneously associated with conversion to THA in this model were older age (rate ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.08; p < 0.0001), lower preoperative modified Harris hip score (rate ratio [RR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99; p = 0.0003), decreased femoral anteversion (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99; p = 0.0111), revision surgery (RR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.15-5.01; p = 0.0193), femoral Outerbridge Grades II to IV (Grade II: RR, 2.23 [95% CI, 1.11-4.46], p = 0.023; Grade III: RR, 2.17, [95% CI, 1.11-4.23], p = 0.024; Grade IV: RR, 2.96 [95% CI, 1.34-6.52], p = 0.007), performance of acetabuloplasty (RR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.03-3.24; p = 0.038), and lack of performance of femoral osteoplasty (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.36-1.06; p = 0.081). Using the results of the multivariate regression, we developed a simplified calculator that may be helpful in counseling a patient regarding the risk of conversion surgery to THA after hip arthroscopy. CONCLUSION: Multiple risk factors have been identified as possible risk factors for conversion to THA after hip arthroscopy. A weighted calculator based on our data is presented here and may be useful for predicting failure after hip arthroscopy for labral treatment. Determining the best candidates for hip preservation remains challenging; careful attention to long-term followup and identifying characteristics associated with successful outcomes should be the focus of further study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Hip Pain in Adolescent Patients With Borderline Dysplasia of the Hip: Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To examine arthroscopic treatment of hip pain in patients with borderline hip dysplasia (lateral center edge angle [LCEA] between 20° and 25°). METHODS: From 2008 to 2013, patients below 18 years of age who underwent arthroscopic hip surgery with an LCEA between 20° and 25° were retrospectively matched 1:1 to a control group without dysplasia (LCEA ≥25°) based on age, gender, femoroplasty, labral treatment, and capsular plication. Indications for surgery included failure to improve with nonoperative treatments and anti-inflammatory medications after 3 months. Patient-reported outcome data were collected using modified Harris hip score, hip outcome score-activities of daily living subscale, hip outcome score-sports-specific subscale, nonarthritic athletic hip score, and visual analog scale. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2013, 168 patients below the age of 18 underwent arthroscopic hip surgery. Twenty-one patients met inclusion criteria and were matched 1:1 to a control group. Follow-up was achieved for 17 patients in both groups (81%). Mean follow-up time, age, and LCEA were 2.19 years, 15.5 years, and 22.3° for the dysplastic group and 2.16 years, 16.0 years, and 31.2° for the control group, respectively. Preoperative patient-reported outcomes between groups were not statistically different. At the latest follow-up, both groups showed statistically significant improvement over baseline in modified Harris hip score, hip outcome score-activities of daily living subscale, hip outcome score-sports-specific subscale, nonarthritic athletic hip score, and visual analog scale (P < .001). Latest follow-up scores were not statistically different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows favorable 2-year outcomes in adolescent patients with borderline dysplasia undergoing labral treatment and capsular plication. Outcomes in the borderline dysplastic patients were as good as those of a control group. Although adolescents with borderline dysplasia have traditionally been a challenging group of patients to treat, these results suggest that an arthroscopic approach that addresses both labral pathology and instability may be beneficial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Clinical application of three-dimensional printing to the management of complex univentricular hearts with abnormal systemic or pulmonary venous drainage.

In recent years, three-dimensional printing has demonstrated reliable reproducibility of several organs including hearts with complex congenital cardiac anomalies. This represents the next step in advanced image processing and can be used to plan surgical repair. In this study, we describe three children with complex univentricular hearts and abnormal systemic or pulmonary venous drainage, in whom three-dimensional printed models based on CT data assisted with preoperative planning. For two children, after group discussion and examination of the models, a decision was made not to proceed with surgery. We extend the current clinical experience with three-dimensional printed modelling and discuss the benefits of such models in the setting of managing complex surgical problems in children with univentricular circulation and abnormal systemic or pulmonary venous drainage.

Survey mode influence on patient-reported outcome scores in orthopaedic surgery: telephone results may be positively biased.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores are used to evaluate treatment modalities in orthopaedic surgery. The method of PRO collection may introduce bias to reported surgical outcomes due to the presence of an interviewer. This study evaluates post-operative PROs for variation of outcomes between survey methods-in-person, online, or telephone. METHODS: From 2008 to 2011, 456 patients underwent arthroscopic surgical treatment for acetabular labral tears. All pre-operative surveys were completed in the clinic during pre-operative visit. Two-year follow-up questionnaires were completed by 385 (84 %) patients. The PRO data were prospectively collected pre- and post-operatively using five tools: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADLS), Hip Outcome Score Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and visual analog scale. Patients were grouped according to method of 2-year follow-up: in-person during follow-up visit (102 patients, 26 %), online by email prompt (138 patients, 36 %), or telephone with an interviewer (145 patients, 38 %). RESULTS: Pre-operative baseline PRO scores demonstrated no statistically significant difference between groups for mHHS, HOS-ADLS, HOS-SSS, and NAHS. Two-year post-operative PRO scores obtained by telephone were statistically greater than scores obtained in-person or online for mHHS (p < 0.001), HOS-ADLS (p < 0.001), and HOS-SSS (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates higher patient-reported outcome scores and greater improvement by telephone surveys compared to in-person or online. The variation of results between collection methods is indicative of a confounding variable. Clinically, it is important to understand these confounding variables in order to assess patient responses and guide treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Outcomes of Revision Hip Arthroscopy: 2-Year Clinical Follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical outcomes, pain, and patient satisfaction following revision hip arthroscopy with a minimum 2-year follow-up. METHODS: From April 2008 to October 2011, data were prospectively collected on all patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy. All patients were assessed pre- and postoperatively with 4 patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), nonarthritic hip score (NAHS), hip outcome score-activities of daily living (HOS-ADL), and hip outcome score-sport-specific subscales (HOS-SSS). Pain was estimated on the visual analog scale (VAS). Patient satisfaction was measured on a scale from 0 to 10. The number of patients who underwent subsequent revision arthroscopy or total hip arthroplasty during the study period is also reported. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients underwent revision hip arthroscopy during the study period. Seventy (80.5%) patients were included in our study. Average follow-up time was 28 months (range, 20 to 47.4 months). In terms of residual femoroacetabular impingement morphology, 45.7% of patients had preoperative alpha angles ≥ 55°, and 7.14% of patients had a lateral center-edge angle ≥ 40°. The score improvement from preoperative to 2-year follow-up was 57.84 to 73.65 for mHHS, 62.79 to 83.04 for HOS-ADL, 37.33 to 54.93 for HOS-SSS, and 55.65 to 70.79 for NAHS. VAS decreased from 6.72 to 4.08. All scores demonstrated statistically significant improvement (P < .001). Overall patient satisfaction was 7.67. Our success rate was 74.58%. Ten (14.29%) patients underwent total hip arthroplasty during the study period. Our hip survivorship was 85.7%. Five (7.14%) patients underwent secondary revision hip arthroscopy during the study period. We found an overall minor complication rate of 10%. CONCLUSIONS: Revision hip arthroscopy for all procedures performed on aggregate has improved clinical outcomes for all PROs, high survivorship, and high patient satisfaction scores at short-term follow-up. Patients should be counseled regarding the potential progression of degenerative change leading to arthroplasty and the potential for revision surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV retrospective case series.

Clinical results of hip arthroscopy for labral tears: a comparison between intraoperative platelet-rich plasma and bupivacaine injection.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective comparative study was to evaluate the effect of intraoperative platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection on the outcomes of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for labral treatment. METHODS: During the period from November 2010 through March 2012, all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for labral tears were considered for this study. The study group received intra-articular PRP at the end of the operation, and the control group received an intra-articular injection of 0.25% bupivacaine. Selection for the study group was based on the day of the week on which the patient underwent surgery. The protocol included administration of 4 hip-specific patient-reported outcome tools. Patients also reported their pain score on a visual analog scale from 0 to 10. Scores were recorded at the preoperative visit and at 3 months and 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: A minimum of 2 years' follow-up was available for 306 patients. Thirteen patients (4.2%) underwent conversion to total hip arthroplasty and 24 patients (7.8%) underwent revision hip arthroscopy, which left 91 patients in the study group and 180 patients in the control group. The study group had slightly higher pain scores than the control group (3.4 v 2.5) 2 years after surgery (P = .005). No difference in pain scores was identified at 3 months postoperatively. The 2-year modified Harris Hip Score was slightly lower in the study group (78.6) than in the control group (82.6) (P = .049). No significant difference was observed for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale, or Non-Arthritic Hip Score at any time point. There was no significant difference between groups for conversion to total hip arthroplasty or revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the results of this study, intraoperative PRP injection does not appear to improve the clinical results of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for labral treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative study.

Labral injury: radiographic predictors at the time of hip arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of multiple demographic and radiographic findings on the size of labral tears identified at the time of hip arthroscopy. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected for patients treated with arthroscopic labral repair or debridement from February 2008 to August 2011. Preoperative radiographic and demographic data were collected for 392 patients during the study period. Exclusion criteria included revision surgery and previous hip conditions. An anteroposterior pelvic view, 45° Dunn view, and false-profile view were used to measure Tönnis grade, neck-shaft angle, alpha angle, lateral center edge angle (LCEA), anterior center edge angle (ACEA), acetabular inclination, and the extent of crossover sign when present. At the time of surgery, labral tear size and location were documented for all patients, using traditional acetabular clock face nomenclature for sizing. A multiple linear regression analysis was then performed to assess the correlation of radiographic and demographic findings with the size of the labral tear. RESULTS: Regression analysis displayed statistical significance for sex (P < .0001), age (P < .0001), and alpha angle (P = .005) with labral tear size. For female patients, Tönnis grade (P = .0004) and neck-shaft angle (P = .004) correlated with labral tear size. This model accounted for only 26% of variation in labral tear size. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative risk factors for the extent of labral tear size are male sex, increasing age, and increasing alpha angle. Labral tears were larger in female patients with higher Tönnis grades and lower neck-shaft angles. Measurements of acetabular coverage and version showed no correlation with labral tear size. The majority of labral tear size variation was not accounted for in this model. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy and Periacetabular Osteotomy.

PURPOSE: To detail our early experience using concomitant hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for the treatment of acetabular dysplasia. METHODS: We prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed the surgical and outcome data of 17 patients who underwent concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO between October 2010 and July 2013. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion, outcome and pain scores, and radiographic data were collected. Intraoperative arthroscopic findings and postoperative complications were recorded. RESULTS: The group consisted of 3 male and 14 female patients with a mean follow-up period of 2.4 years. Three patients had undergone previous surgery on the affected hip. Chondrolabral pathology was identified in all 17 patients. Twelve patients underwent labral repair, and five patients underwent partial labral debridement. No patient was converted to total hip arthroplasty or required revision surgery at short-term follow-up. All 4 patient-reported outcome scores showed statistically significant changes from baseline to latest follow-up (P < .001). An excellent outcome was obtained in 82% of patients (13 of 16). The lateral center-edge angle averaged 11° preoperatively and 29° postoperatively. The acetabular inclination averaged 18° preoperatively and 3° postoperatively. The anterior center-edge angle averaged 7° preoperatively and 27° postoperatively. At most recent radiographic follow-up, 1 patient had progression of arthritic changes but remained asymptomatic. No other patient showed any radiographic evidence of progression of arthritis. Complications included 3 superficial wound infections, 1 pulmonary embolism, and 1 temporary sciatic neurapraxia. CONCLUSIONS: Our initial experience with concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO has been favorable. We noted that all our patients have evidence of chondrolabral damage at the time of PAO when the joint is distracted and evaluated. All patients in this series had intra-articular pathology treated arthroscopically and showed satisfactory mean clinical improvement. Hip arthroscopy with PAO did not appear to introduce complications beyond the PAO alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

A matched-pair controlled study of microfracture of the hip with average 2-year follow-up: do full-thickness chondral defects portend an inferior prognosis in hip arthroscopy?

PURPOSE: This study compared 2-year clinical outcomes in hip arthroscopy patients treated with microfracture to a matched control group without full-thickness chondral damage. METHODS: During the study period between June 2008 and July 2011, data were collected on all patients treated with hip arthroscopy who underwent microfracture. All patients were assessed pre- and postoperatively with 4 patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Pain was estimated on the visual analog scale (VAS), and satisfaction was measured on a scale from 0 to 10. A matched-pair group of patients who did not undergo microfracture was selected in a 1:2 ratio. Matching criteria were age within 5 years, sex, surgical procedures, and radiographic findings. RESULTS: Average follow-up for the study was 26.66 months (17.29 to 48.89 months). Forty-nine hips were included in the microfracture group and 98 hips were in entered in the nonmicrofracture group, with no significant difference in PRO scores preoperatively between the groups. Both groups had statistically significant postoperative improvement in all scores, and the average amount of change from preoperative to postoperative scores between the 2 groups was not statistically significantly different for any of the PRO scores. Most importantly, there was no statistically significant difference in postoperative PRO scores between the microfracture and control groups. Patient satisfaction was 6.9 for the microfracture group and 7.84 for the nonmicrofracture group, which was statistically significant (P < .05). When comparing patients who received acetabular microfracture to those who received femoral microfracture, both groups had similar preoperative and postoperative PRO scores, with no significant difference in the magnitude of change (delta) at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that patients undergoing microfracture during hip arthroscopy did not show a statistically significant difference in PRO scores when compared with a matched-pair control group at an average of 2 years of follow-up. Both groups showed significant improvement in all PRO scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, matched case-control study.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Labral Tears in Patients Aged 60 Years or Older.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to (1) evaluate the clinical outcomes of a series of patients aged 60 years or older who underwent hip arthroscopy for labral tears with minimum 2-year follow-up and (2) identify risk factors for conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: Outcome data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed in patients aged 60 years or older who underwent hip arthroscopy between April 2008 and May 2012. Four patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores, pain scores, and satisfaction ratings were collected. Conversion to THA and revision surgery rates were recorded. A subgroup analysis compared survivors with patients requiring THA. RESULTS: Minimum 2-year follow-up was available for 30 patients with a mean age of 63.9 years. The 2-year survivorship rate was 70%, with 9 patients undergoing conversion to THA at a mean of 1.1 years after hip arthroscopy. Two patients required additional surgery during the study period, for a reoperation rate of 37% (11 of 30 patients). The remaining cohort showed mean improvements in all PRO scores. All scores, except the sports-related PRO (P = .12), improved significantly from the preoperative baseline scores. Visual analog scale scores for pain decreased from a mean of 5.0 preoperatively to 2.7 postoperatively (P = .003). Patients who required conversion to THA had lower preoperative modified Harris Hip Scores (P = .015), lower preoperative Hip Outcome Score-Activity of Daily Living values (P = .01), higher pain scores (P = .05), greater acetabular inclination (P = .023), and more severe chondral damage (P = .033). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic treatment of labral tears in patients aged 60 years or older should be approached with caution. Patients in this age group had an overall 2-year survivorship rate of 70% and should be counseled before surgery on the possibility of subsequent conversion to THA. Patients aged 60 years or older with poor preoperative PRO scores, high pain scores, radiographic evidence of borderline dysplasia, and severe chondral damage may be poor candidates for hip arthroscopy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Best Practices During Hip Arthroscopy: Aggregate Recommendations of High-Volume Surgeons.

PURPOSE: To survey surgeons who perform a high volume of hip arthroscopy procedures regarding their operative technique, type of procedure, and postoperative management. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 27 high-volume orthopaedic surgeons specializing in hip arthroscopy to report their preferences and practices related to their operative practice and postoperative rehabilitation protocol. All participants completed the survey in person in an anonymous fashion during a meeting of the American Hip Institute. RESULTS: All surgeons perform hip arthroscopy with the patient in the supine position, accessing the central compartment of the hip initially, using intraoperative fluoroscopy. All surgeons perform labral repair (100%), with the majority performing labral reconstructions (77.8%) and gluteus medius repairs (81.5%). There is variability in the type of anchors used during labral repair. Most surgeons perform capsular closure in most cases (88.9%), inject either intra-articular cortisone or platelet-rich plasma at the conclusion of the procedure (59%), and prescribe a postoperative hip brace for some or all patients (59%). There is considerable variability in rehabilitation protocols. All surgeons routinely prescribe postoperative heterotopic ossification prophylaxis to their patients, with most surgeons (88.9%) prescribing a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication for 3 weeks. Forty percent of the respondents use the modified Harris Hip Score as the most important outcome measure. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent practices such as use of intraoperative fluoroscopy, heterotopic ossification prophylaxis, and labral repair skills were identified by surveying 27 hip arthroscopy surgeons at high-volume centers. Most of the surgeons performed routine capsular closure unless underlying conditions precluded capsular release or plication. The survey identified higher variability between surgeons regarding postoperative rehabilitation protocols and use of intra-articular pharmacologic injections at the end of the procedure. These data may provide surgeons with a set of aggregate trends that may help guide training, clinical practice, and research in the evolving field of hip arthroscopy.

The learning curve associated with robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty.

There are no reports examining the learning curve during the adoption of robotic assisted THA. The purpose of this study was to examine the learning curve of robotic assisted THA as measured by component position, operative time, and complications. The first 105 robotic-assisted THAs performed by a single surgeon were divided into three groups based on the order of surgery. Component position, operative time, intra-operative technical problems, and intra-operative complications were recorded. There was a decreased risk of acetabular component malpositioning with experience (P<0.05). Operative time appeared to decrease with increasing surgical experience (P<0.05). A learning curve was observed, as a decreased incidence of acetabular component outliers and decreased operative time were noted with increased experience.

Does Robotic-Assisted Computer Navigation Affect Acetabular Cup Positioning in Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Obese Patient? A Comparison Study.

Obese populations present challenges for acetabular cup placement during total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study examines the accuracy of acetabular cup inclination and version in the obese patient with robotic-assisted computer navigation. A total of 105 patients underwent robotic-assisted computer navigation THA with a posterior approach. Groups were divided on body mass index (BMI, kg/m(2)) of <30, 30-35, and >35. There was no statistical difference between the BMI <30 (n=59), BMI 30-35 (n=34) and BMI >35 (n=12) groups for acetabular inclination (P=0.43) or version (P=0.95). Robotic-assisted computer navigation provided accurate and reproducible placement of the acetabular cup within safe zones for inclination and version in the obese patient.

Accuracy of Component Positioning in 1980 Total Hip Arthroplasties: A Comparative Analysis by Surgical Technique and Mode of Guidance.

The purpose of this multi-surgeon study was to assess and compare the accuracy of acetabular component placement, leg length discrepancy (LLD), and global offset difference (GOD) between six different surgical techniques and modes of guidance in total hip arthroplasty (THA). A total of 1980 THAs met inclusion criteria. Robotic- and navigation-guided techniques were more consistent than other techniques in placing the acetabular cup into Lewinnek's safe zone (P<0.005 and P<0.05, respectively). Robotic-guided surgery was more consistent than other techniques in placing the acetabular component within Callanan's safe zone (P<0.005). No statistically significant differences were found between groups in the frequency of patients with excessive LLD. Clinically significant differences between groups were not found in the frequency of patients with excessive GOD. Level of Evidence: IV.

The effect of liposomal bupivacaine injection during total hip arthroplasty: a controlled cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia following total hip arthroplasty has been shown to improve patient satisfaction, participation with physical therapy, and allow early return to self care. Liposomal bupivacaine is a formulation of local anesthetic which has the potential to provide anesthesia for up to 72 hours following administration. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine with bupivacaine following total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on 28 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty or hip resurfacing who received intraoperative administration of liposomal bupivacaine. A control group of 30 patients who had previously undergone total hip arthroplasty or hip resurfacing and had received intraoperative administration of bupivacaine also underwent a chart review. Length of stay, post-operative opioid use, and pain scores were compared for both groups. RESULTS: The average length of stay in the study group was 1.93 days and the control group length of stay was 2.47 days (p ≤ 0.05). Morphine equivalent use was less in the study group during the first 24 hours compared to the control group (p ≤0.05). During the second and third 24 hours the morphine equivalent use difference was not statistically significant. Visual analogue scores were not significantly different between groups at any time point. CONCLUSION: Liposomal bupivacaine administration during total hip arthroplasty appears to decrease the need for opioid use post operatively and decrease length of stay. The results of this study justify the need for a well-designed randomized controlled trial utilizing liposomal bupivacaine as part of multimodal analgesia during THA.

The prevalence of hip labral and chondral lesions identified by method of detection during periacetabular osteotomy: arthroscopy versus arthrotomy.

PURPOSE: Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) has become an accepted treatment option for patients with severe hip dysplasia. In addition to correcting acetabular architecture, consideration has been given to concomitant joint evaluation and treatment of coexisting intra-articular pathologic conditions, which can be identified with hip arthroscopy or through an open arthrotomy. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the prevalence of intra-articular pathologic conditions identified arthroscopically compared with that of those identified with open arthrotomy. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed by a search of PubMed using the words "periacetabular osteotomy," "Bernese osteotomy," and "Ganz osteotomy." Two reviewers searched for relevant articles that met established inclusion criteria, which follow: (1) they were in the English language, (2) they contained data on patients who underwent periacetabular osteotomy, (3) the study patients underwent concomitant arthroscopy or arthrotomy, and (4) the studies contained data on the intra-articular findings at the time of osteotomy. Exclusion criteria included review articles, technique articles, articles reporting on the same patient population, and articles without reported patient data. RESULTS: After review of 361 references and abstracts, 8 articles met the inclusion criteria. A total of 775 patients who had undergone PAO were included in the 8 articles. Three articles inspected all joints at the time of PAO and accounted for 345 PAOs. Arthrotomy was used to evaluate 151 hips, and 31 (21%) labral tears were identified. Arthroscopy was used to evaluate 194 hips, and 162 (84%) labral tears were identified. The difference in prevalence is statistically significant (P < .05). Two of the 3 articles reported chondral injury: 141 (73%) acetabular chondral injuries and 52 (27%) femoral chondral injuries were noted in 194 hips. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of intra-articular damage, including labral injuries and pathologic conditions of cartilage, at the time of PAO is substantial. Labral tears and chondral injury appear to be better recognized with concomitant arthroscopy when compared with arthrotomy at the time of PAO. Further study is needed to determine whether the treatment of chondrolabral injuries can improve patient outcome and reduce reoperations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.

Safety measures in hip arthroscopy and their efficacy in minimizing complications: a systematic review of the evidence.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the literature to determine complications of hip arthroscopy, with a secondary focus on how to minimize complications and risks. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed a search of PubMed for articles that contained at least 1 of the following terms: complications and hip arthroscopy, hip impingement, femoral acetabular impingement and complications, or femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and complications. The search was limited to articles published between 1999 and June 2013. An additional search was performed for articles evaluating techniques on how to minimize complications. RESULTS: We identified 81 studies (5,535 patients; 6,277 hips). The mean age was 35.48 years, and the mean body mass index was 25.20 kg/m(2). Of the participants, 52% were male and 48% were female. The majority of studies were Level IV Evidence (63%). A total of 285 complications were reported, for an overall rate of 4.5%. There were 26 major complications (0.41%) and a 4.1% minor complication rate. The overall reoperation rate was 4.03%. A total of 94 hips underwent revision arthroscopy. Regarding open procedures, 150 patients (93%) underwent either total hip arthroplasty or a hip resurfacing procedure. The conversion rate to total hip arthroplasty or a resurfacing procedure was 2.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, primary hip arthroscopy is a successful procedure with low rates of major (0.41%) and minor (4.1%) complications. The reoperation rate was 4.03% in our review. There is admittedly a learning curve to performing hip arthroscopy, and we present a systematic review of the complications and how to minimize these complications with careful technique and planning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II to V studies.

The hip-spine syndrome: how does back pain impact the indications and outcomes of hip arthroscopy?

PURPOSE: Many patients presenting with hip disease also have coexisting lumbar spine disease (LSD). At present there is a paucity of literature examining the effect of arthroscopic hip surgery in patients with coexisting LSD. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the relationship between the hip and lumbar spine to determine whether low back pain impacts the indications and outcomes for surgical intervention of the hip. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed by a search of PubMed using the following search terms: (1) hip, back, and motion; (2) hip, back, and pain; and (3) hip, lumbar spine, and pain. Two reviewers searched for relevant articles that met established inclusion criteria. We excluded review articles, technique articles, articles reporting on the same patient population, and articles without reported patient data. Kinematic data pertaining to the hip for patients with low back pain was collected. Preoperative and postoperative data were collected for patients treated for hip disease in the setting of LSD. RESULTS: After examining 2,020 references and abstracts, 15 articles were selected for this review. Patients with low back pain consistently demonstrated decreased hip range of motion compared with controls. Patients undergoing hip surgery with coexisting LSD showed improvement in the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Harris Hip Score (HHS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), SF-36 scores, and the Owestry Disability Index. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low back pain frequently have limited or altered hip range of motion, and these patients routinely improve after surgical intervention for hip disease. Surgical intervention for hip disease should be considered in the context of low back pain and LSD. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

High-risk Fontan completion patients achieve low perioperative risk and benefit from cavopulmonary connection 7 years out†.

OBJECTIVES: Our unit has pursued Fontan completion in all patients except those with immobility or combined poor ventricular function and high pulmonary artery pressures. We assessed retrospectively whether conventional high-risk criteria would predict patients with a poorer outcome. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-three consecutive children who underwent extracardiac Fontan completion (2004-2012) had their outcomes recorded (mean follow-up of 7 years). Three groups were analysed: those with 1 of 6 historical risk factors (outside 6 commandments), those with 1 of reduced systemic ventricular function or pulmonary artery pressure >15 mmHg (outside 2 commandments) versus those with no contraindications. The Fischer's exact test examined frequency differences, with the χ2 test to look for outcome associations. RESULTS: There were no differences in postoperative complication rates between the outside 6 commandments (n = 105) or outside 2 commandments (n = 49) versus the low-risk no-contraindication group (n = 28): arrhythmias [18% (P = 0.3) or 18% (P = 0.3) vs 25%], infection [22% (P = 0.6) or 33% (P = 0.2) vs 21%], cerebrovascular accident [6% (P = 0.5) or 10% (P = 0.3) vs 4%], length of stay [20 days (P = 0.4) or 23 days (P = 0.2) vs 21 days] and duration of chest drainage (P = 0.5). There was 1 predischarge mortality in each group. Long term, the majority of patients in each group had suitable haemodynamics for fenestration closure [95% (P = 0.7) or 95% (P = 0.7) vs 92%]. Long term, there was no difference in the rate of arrhythmias [11% (P = 0.5) or 12.5% (P = 0.3) vs 7%], protein-losing enteropathy [1% (P = 0.1) or 2% (P = 0.3) vs 7%] or moderate or more ventricular dysfunction on echocardiography [2% (P = 0.7) or 4% (P = 0.7) vs 4%]. Notably, there was a higher rate of catheter reinterventions in the high-risk groups [22% (P < 0.05) or 24% (P < 0.05) vs 7%]. CONCLUSIONS: The medium-term benefits of Fontan completion can be achieved for high-risk patients, suggesting that historical selection criteria should be re-examined.

Atrioventricular septal defect and tetralogy of Fallot - A single tertiary center experience: A retrospective review.

BACKGROUND: Complete atrioventricular septal defect (CAVSD) in association with tetralogy of Fallot is a rare and complex disease that makes its repair more difficult than repair of either lesion alone. We reviewed retrospectively our experience in managing this lesion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 2006 and May 2017, 16 patients who underwent repair of CAVSD/tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) were reviewed retrospectively. Fifteen patients had trisomy 21. Five patients underwent primary repair while eleven patients went for staged repair in the form of right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) stenting (n = 9) or systemic to pulmonary (S-P) surgical shunt (n = 2). RVOT stenting has replaced surgical shunt since 2012 in our center. Early presentation with cyanosis was the main determinant factor for staged versus primary repair. RESULTS: The median age at first palliation was 46 days (range 15-99 days). The median age at total repair for both groups was 6 months (range 3-18 months); the median age for the palliated patients was 6.5 months (range 5-18 months) while the median age for primary repaired patients was 5 months (range 3-11 months). The median weight at final repair was 6.9 kg (3.7-8.2 kg). The pulmonary valve was preserved in five patients (31%), four of them had no prior palliation. Chylothorax occurred in 50% of the patients. One late mortality occurred after final repair due to sepsis. CONCLUSION: CAVSD/TOF can be repaired with low mortality and morbidity. The use of RVOT stent has replaced the surgical (S-P) shunt with acceptable results in our center.