Editorial Commentary: Primary Treatment of Hip Labral, Osseous, Chondral, Capsular, and Extra-Articular Pathology Is Essential: Outcomes Following Revision Are Less Predictable.

Appropriate labral management is one of many procedures during hip arthroscopy that affects postoperative outcomes and revision rates. Both primary labral repair and reconstruction have been shown to have superior clinical and functional outcomes compared with labral debridement when treating unstable labral tears. Arthroscopic labral reconstruction is one of the most powerful techniques in the arsenal of complex hip-preservation surgeons, and although often reserved for the revision setting, when the native labrum is irreparable, a primary reconstruction may be indicated when the only alternatives are selective labral debridement or a suboptimal repair. Labral reconstruction, either in primary or revision procedures, is indicated when the existing labrum is deemed irreparable based on an intraoperative evaluation. Current indications for primary labral reconstruction, either in the primary or revision setting, include a calcified labrum, an irreparable mixed Seldes type 1 and 2 tear, or a hypoplastic labrum with less than 3 mm of viable tissue. Primary hip arthroscopy has been shown to have superior outcomes compared with revision hip arthroscopy, whether with labral repair or reconstruction. Finally, appropriate labral management is necessary but not always sufficient. Hip arthroscopy requires management of osseous deformities, with care taken to avoid under- and over-resection during both femoroplasty and acetabuloplasty; management of chondral injury; and management of the hip capsule with repair or plication. Consideration also must be given to potential extra-articular pain generators, such as abductor insufficiency, ischiofemoral impingement, lumbar spine disease, as well as deformities requiring open surgical correction such as acetabular dysplasia or pathologic femoral version. The primary goal is getting it right the first time.

Orthobiologics as an adjunct in treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: cell-based therapies facilitate improved postoperative outcomes in the setting of acetabular chondral lesions-a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate studies utilizing orthobiologics in the management of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) to (1) assess the indications for usage, and (2) analyze patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) following treatment. It was hypothesized that orthobiologics would (1) be utilized for symptomatic FAIS in the setting of labral or chondral pathology, and (2) improve PROM at most recent follow-up. METHODS: The Pubmed, Ovid Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched for clinical studies evaluating orthobiologics [hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), or cell-based therapy (CBT) for treatment of FAIS. Exclusion criteria included orthobiologics used in conjunction with cartilage transfer or scaffolding procedures and a primary indication other than FAIS. Data collection included patient demographics, indications, and baseline and most recent PROM. RESULTS: Eleven studies (one level I, four level II, four level III, and two level IV evidence) met inclusion criteria, consisting of 440 patients with mean ages ranging from 32.8 to 47 years. All 11 studies demonstrated an improvement in PROM from baseline to most-recent follow-up. Four studies administered PRP either intraoperatively or the day after surgery as an adjunct to labral repair. CBT was used intraoperatively in the setting of acetabular chondral lesions (three studies) and labral repair (one study). When comparing to a control group at most recent follow-up, three PRP cohorts demonstrated similar PROM (n.s.), while one PRP group exhibited worse visual analog pain scores (2.5 vs. 3.4, p = 0.005) and modified Harris Hip Scores (mHHS) (82.6 vs. 78.7, p = 0.049). The four CBT studies reported favorable results compared to a control group, with a significantly higher mHHS at most recent follow-up or mean improvement from baseline in Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (p < 0.05). Three studies reported on HA, which was utilized exclusively in the nonoperative setting. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative PRP and CBT have been commonly reported in the setting of hip arthroscopy for labral repairs and acetabular chondral lesions, respectively. The CBT cohorts demonstrated more favorable PROM at most recent follow-up when compared to a control group, though these results should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity of orthobiologic preparations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Low Ceiling Effects of the Forgotten Joint Score Compared With Legacy Measures After Joint-Preserving Procedures: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To determine, in patients undergoing joint preservation procedures, whether the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) compares favorably with legacy measures. METHODS: Medical databases (including PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases) were queried for publications with the terms "Forgotten Joint Score" and "hip," "knee," "arthroscopy," or "ACL." Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Methodologic quality was assessed through the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist, and psychometric data were evaluated for ceiling or floor effects, convergent validity, internal consistency, reliability, responsiveness, measurement invariance, and measurement error by 2 fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons (B.D.K. and W.T.H.). RESULTS: Data were collected from 14 studies using the FJS after joint-preserving procedures in 911 patients (959 joints). Four studies reported strong internal consistency with an average Cronbach α of 0.92. Two studies reported responsiveness with an effect size ranging from 0.6 to 1.16. One study reported reproducibility with an interclass correlation coefficient of 0.9 (95% confidence interval, 0.8-0.9). One study reported measurement error with an minimum detectable change (MDC)individual of 32% and MDCgroup of 4.5%. Studies reported moderate to very strong convergent validity across legacy measures for hip and knee preservation surgery. Ceiling effects were favorable compared with many legacy scores for hip and knee preservation. Three studies reported the minimal clinically important difference whereas 1 study reported the patient acceptable symptomatic state for the FJS. CONCLUSIONS: The FJS is a methodologically sound outcome measure used to evaluate patient outcomes after hip and knee preservation surgery with overall low ceiling effects compared with legacy measures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Threshold Values for Success After Hip Arthroscopy Using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Assessment: Determining the Minimum Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State.

BACKGROUND: Threshold values for patient-reported outcome measures, such as the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), are important for relating postoperative outcomes to meaningful functional improvement. PURPOSE: To determine the PASS and MCID after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaire. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement were administered preoperative and minimum 1-year postoperative PROMIS surveys focusing on physical function (PF) and pain interference (PI). External anchor questions for the MCID and PASS were given with the postoperative PROMIS survey. Receiver operator curves were constructed to determine the threshold values for the MCID and PASS. Curves were generated for the study population as well as separate cohorts segregated by median baseline PF or PI scores and preoperative athletic participation. A multivariate post hoc analysis was then constructed to evaluate factors associated with achieving the PASS or MCID. RESULTS: There were 113 patients (35% male; mean ± SD age, 32.8 ± 12.5 years; body mass index, 25.8 ± 4.8 kg/m2), with 60 (53%) reporting preoperative athletic participation. Survey time averaged 77.5 ± 49.2 seconds. Anchor-based MCID values were 5.1 and 10.9 for the PF and PI domains, respectively. PASS thresholds were 51.8 and 51.9 for the PF and PI, respectively. PASS values were not affected by baseline scores, but athletic patients had a higher PASS threshold than did those not participating in a sport (53.1 vs 44.7). MCID values were affected by preoperative baseline scores but were largely independent of sports participation. A post hoc analysis found that 94 (83%) patients attained the MCID PF while 66 (58%) attained the PASS PF. A multivariate nominal logistic regression found that younger patients (P = .01) and athletic patients (P = .003) were more likely to attain the PASS. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS survey is an efficient metric to evaluate preoperative disability and postoperative function after primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. The MCID and PASS provide surgeons with threshold values to help determine PROMIS scores that are clinically meaningful to patients, and they can assist with therapeutic decision making as well as expectation setting.

Editorial Commentary: Bilateral Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: What We Know Now and Where Do We Go From Here?

Patients with bilateral femoroacetabular impingement syndrome treated with either staged or simultaneous hip arthroscopy have similar postoperative outcomes compared with patients undergoing unilateral procedures. A longer duration between surgeries is associated with inferior outcomes; however, the reasons underlying this trend are unclear. Identifying prognostic variables that are associated with contralateral symptom onset and disease progression are important goals for future investigation.

Diversity among academic orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgery faculty in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to perform a cross-sectional analysis of diversity among academic shoulder and elbow surgeons in the United States. METHODS: US shoulder and elbow surgeons who participated in shoulder and elbow fellowship and/or orthopedic surgery resident education as of November 2018 were included. Demographic data (age, gender, race), practice setting, years in practice, academic rank, and leadership roles were collected through publicly available databases and professional profiles. Descriptive statistics were performed and findings were compared between different racial and gender groups. Statistical significance was set at P <.05. RESULTS: A total of 186 orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgeons were identified as participating in shoulder and elbow fellowship and/or orthopedic surgery residency education. Overall, 83.9% were white, 14.5% were Asian, 1.1% were Hispanic, 0.5% were an other race, and 0% were African American. In addition, 94.6% of surgeons were male, whereas 5.4% were female. Further, 64.5% of all surgeons had been in practice for >10 years, and 39.2% worked in an urban setting. Less than half (40.3%) of the surgeons practicing primarily at academic institutions held a professor rank. White surgeons had a significantly greater time in practice vs. nonwhite surgeons (mean 18.8 vs. 12.6 years, P < .01) and were more likely to hold a professor rank (44.0% vs. 21.7%, P = .04). CONCLUSION: Racial and gender diversity among US shoulder and elbow surgeons who participate in fellowship and residency education is lacking. Hispanic, African American, and female surgeons are underrepresented. Efforts should be made to identify the reasons for these deficiencies and address them to further advance the field of orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgery.

Lack of Additional Advanced Graduate Training by Orthopaedic Surgeons in Academic Practice: Current Employment and Recruitment Trends.

BACKGROUND: Orthopaedic surgery is ever changing and depends on diverse technical and intellectual skill sets. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the percentage of academic orthopaedic surgeons with additional graduate degrees in the United States. METHODS: Data including advanced degree(s) (eg, PhD, MS, MBA, MPH, JD, and DVM), academic rank, leadership position, subspecialty, years since training completion, and sex were collected from websites for all academic orthopaedic surgery departments in the United States. Univariate analyses were performed to evaluate for differences in demographic data based on the advanced degree status. Data from the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) were used to characterize graduate degree-holding US senior medical students who ranked orthopaedic surgery first relative to peers without additional advanced degrees and to applicants who ranked other specialties first. RESULTS: Of 4,519 faculty at 175 academic orthopaedic surgery departments in the United States, 7.1% held a graduate degree in addition to a medical doctorate. There was no difference in the percentage of faculty who held departmental leadership positions (P = 0.62) or who were full professors (P = 0.66) based on holding an additional graduate degree. Of 678 US senior applicants who ranked orthopaedic surgery first and successfully matched into the specialty in 2018, 12.5% held an additional graduate degree and 1.3% were MD-PhDs. Orthopaedic surgery had the second lowest percentage of matched medical students with additional advanced degrees, which was significantly lower than the top 10 specialties (range 16.1% to 21.6%; P < 0.05). Orthopaedic surgery recruited 1.6% of all MD-PhD applicants in 2018. DISCUSSION: Few academic orthopaedic surgery faculty and admitted orthopaedic residency candidates have additional graduate school training. The low percentage of orthopaedic faculty and trainees with additional advanced degrees relative to other specialties may represent a missed opportunity to recruit individuals with diverse skills to advance the field of orthopaedic surgery.

Acetabular Morphologic Characteristics Predict Early Conversion to Arthroplasty After Isolated Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy in the setting of dysplasia and borderline dysplasia is controversial. Dysplasia severity is most often defined by the lateral center edge angle (LCEA) but can also be evaluated radiographically by the acetabular inclination (AI). PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to determine the effect of AI on outcomes after isolated hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). We hypothesized that patients with dysplasia would have higher rates of arthroplasty as well as inferior clinical and functional outcomes compared with patients who did not have dysplasia. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A hip arthroscopy registry was reviewed for participants undergoing arthroscopic correction of FAI from February 28, 2008, to June 10, 2013. Participants required a clinical diagnosis and isolated arthroscopic correction of FAI with preoperative imaging and intraoperative cartilage status recorded. AI dysplasia was defined as an AI greater than 10°, LCEA dysplasia as LCEA less than 18°, and borderline LCEA dysplasia as LCEA 18° to 25°. Patients without an acetabular deformity (LCEA 25°-40°; AI <10°) served as a control population. Postoperative variables included patient-reported outcome surveys with conversion to arthroplasty as the primary endpoint. Minimum 5-year outcome scores were obtained for 337 of 419 patients (80.4%) with an average follow-up of 75.2 ± 12.7 months. RESULTS: This study included 419 patients: 9 (2%) with LCEA dysplasia, 42 (10%) with AI dysplasia, and 51 (12%) with borderline dysplasia. The AI but not LCEA was significantly correlated with lower outcome scores on the modified Harris Hip Score (r = 0.13; P = .01), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (r = 0.10; P = .04), and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (r = 0.11; P = .04). A total of 58 patients (14%) underwent arthroplasty at 31 ± 20 months postoperatively. Patients with LCEA dysplasia had an arthroplasty rate of 56% (odds ratio, 8.4), whereas patients with AI dysplasia had an arthroplasty rate of 31% (odds ratio, 3.3), which was significantly greater than the rate for the nondysplastic cohort (13.5%; P < .0001). Patients with borderline LCEA dysplasia did not have increased rates of arthroplasty. A multivariate analysis found increasing age, increasing AI, Tönnis grade higher than 1, and femoral Outerbridge grade higher than 2 to be most predictive of conversion to arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: We found that an elevated AI, along with increasing age, Tönnis grade, and femoral Outerbridge grade significantly predict early conversion to arthroplasty after isolated hip arthroscopy. We recommend using the AI, in addition to the LCEA, in evaluating hip dysplasia before hip arthroscopy.

A T-capsulotomy provides increased hip joint visualization compared with an extended interportal capsulotomy.

The purpose of this study was to compare the cross-sectional area (CSA) of joint visualization between extended interportal and T-capsulotomies. Twenty fresh-frozen cadaveric hips were dissected to their capsuloligamentous complexes and fixed in a custom apparatus in neutral hip position. Ten hips underwent sequential interportal capsulotomies at lengths of 2, 4, 6, and 8 cm. Ten hips underwent sequential T-capsulotomies starting from a 4 cm interportal capsulotomy, creating a 2 cm T-capsulotomy (Half-T), and finally a 4 cm T-capsulotomy (Full-T). Following each sequential capsule change in both groups, a high-resolution digital photograph was taken to measure the visualized intra-articular cross-sectional area (CSA). Independent t-test was used to compare CSA interportal and T-capsulotomy groups. Analysis demonstrated a statistically significant increase in CSA visualization with each sequential increase in interportal capsulotomy length up to 6 cm (2cm: 0.6 ± 0.2 cm2; 4cm: 2.1 ± 0.5 cm2 (p<0.001); 6cm: 3.6 ± 1.0 cm2 (p=0.001)), and no difference at 8cm (4.2 ± 1.2 cm2 (p=0.20)). For the T-capsulotomy group the average CSA visualization significantly increased from 3.2 ± 0.9 cm2 for the Half-T to 7.1 ± 1.0 cm2 for the Full-T (p<0.001). The Half-T CSA visualization was not statistically different from the 6 cm capsulotomy (p=0.4) and the 8cm capsulotomy (p=0.05). The Full-T had significantly superior CSA visualization area as compared to the 6 cm and 8 cm interportal capsulotomies (p<0.001 for both). In conclusion, T-capsulotomy resulted in improved cross-sectional area of joint visualization compared to an extended (8cm) interportal capsulotomy in a cadaveric model. Surgeons must weigh the benefits of greater visualization from T-capsulotomy that may help to avoid residual FAI while ensuring to completely repair the capsulotomy to avoid iatrogenic instability.

Vertical Extension of the T-Capsulotomy Incision in Hip Arthroscopic Surgery Does Not Affect the Force Required for Hip Distraction: Effect of Capsulotomy Size, Type, and Subsequent Repair.

BACKGROUND: Interportal and T-capsulotomies are popular techniques for exposing femoroacetabular impingement deformities. The difference between techniques with regard to the force required to distract the hip is currently unknown. PURPOSE: To quantify how increasing interportal capsulotomy size, conversion to T-capsulotomy, and subsequent repair affect the force required to distract the hip. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric hip specimens were dissected and fixed in a materials testing system, such that pure axial distraction of the iliofemoral ligament could be achieved. The primary outcome measure was the load required to distract the hip to a distance of 6 mm at a rate of 0.5 mm/s. Each hip was tested in the intact state and then sequentially under varying capsulotomy conditions: 2-cm interportal, 4-cm interportal, half-T (4-cm interportal and 2-cm T-capsulotomy), and full-T (4-cm interportal and 4-cm T-capsulotomy). After serial testing, isolated T-limb repair and then subsequent complete repair were performed. Repaired specimens underwent distraction testing as previously stated to assess the ability to restore hip stability to the native profile. Distraction force as well as the relative distraction force (percentage normalized to the intact capsule) were compared between all capsulotomy and repair conditions. RESULTS: Increasing interportal capsulotomy size from 2 to 4 cm resulted in significantly less force required to distract the hip ( P < .001). The largest relative decrease in force was seen between the intact state (274.6 ± 71.2 N; 100%) and 2-cm interportal (209.7 ± 73.2 N; 76.4% ± 15.6%; P = .0008). There was no significant mean difference in distraction force when 4-cm interportal (160.4 ± 79.8 N) was converted to half-T (140.7 ± 73.5 N; P = .270) and then full-T (112.0 ± 70.2 N; P = .204). When compared with the intact state, isolated T-limb repair partially restored stability (177.3 ± 86.3 N; 63.5% ± 19.8%; P < .0001), while complete repair exceeded native values (331.7 ± 103.7 N; 122.7% ± 15.1%; P = .0008). CONCLUSION: The conversion of interportal capsulotomy to T-capsulotomy did not significantly affect the force required to distract the hip in a cadaveric model. However, larger interportal capsulotomies resulted in significant stepwise decreases in distraction force. When performing interportal or T-capsulotomy, the iliofemoral ligament strength is significantly decreased, but complete capsular repair demonstrated the ability to restore joint stability to the native, intact hip. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Increasing interportal capsulotomy size decreases the force required to distract the hip. In an effort to maximize visualization and minimize the magnitude of iliofemoral ligament fibers cut, many surgeons have moved from extended interportal capsulotomy to T-capsulotomy. Interportal and T-capsulotomies result in equivalent hip distraction, partial capsular repair marginally improves hip stability, and only complete repair has the ability to restore the hip to its native biomechanical profile.

Clinically Meaningful Improvements After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adolescent and Young Adult Patients Regardless of Gender.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine if adolescent and young adult patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) experience clinically meaningful improvements in functional outcome scores. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients under age 18 who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for symptomatic FAI was identified using our institution's hip registry. Demographics, preoperative radiographic measurements, and preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome scores [Hip Outcome Score (HOS), Activity of Daily Living (ADL), and Sports-Specific Subscale (SS), and modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS)] were collected. Percentage of patients achieving minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were determined using published cutoffs for HOS and MHHS in FAI patients. RESULTS: Forty-three patients met study inclusion criteria, and 37 patients (86%) were available at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Mean age was 17.0±1.4 years, 70% were female, and 8.1% had an open proximal femoral physis. All competitive high school and college athletes were able to return to sport. Patients experienced significant improvements following hip arthroscopy in HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, and MHHS scores (all P<0.0001). MCID was achieved in 81% of patients (27/34) for HOS-ADL, 97% (33/34) for HOS-SS, and 84% (27/32) for MHHS. PASS was achieved for 76% of patients (26/34) for HOS-ADL, 79% (27/34) for HOS-SS, and 81% (26/32) for MHHS. Lower body mass index but not age or sex was correlated with a greater improvement in MHHS scores (r=0.39; P=0.03). There were 2 minor complications and no revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent and young adult patients experienced statistically significant improved functional outcomes 2 years after hip arthroscopy for FAI. In addition, these outcomes can be achieved with a low complication rate and a high return to preoperative activity. Approximately 80% of patients achieved clinically significant outcomes based on MCID and PASS criteria. Patient improvements in MHHS were equal regardless of age or sex; however, lower preoperative body mass index led to greater postoperative MHHS improvements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-therapeutic case series.

Hip Arthroscopic Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement With Capsular Management: Factors Associated With Achieving Clinically Significant Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing interest in defining clinically meaningful outcomes in patient reported outcomes following orthopaedic surgery. Little is known about the factors associated with clinically meaningful outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. PURPOSE: To report on a large, prospectively collected consecutive series of patients who underwent comprehensive arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and capsular management with greater than 2-year follow-up. The objectives were to determine (1) what percentage of patients achieve clinically significant outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI as determined by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and (2) what factors are associated with achieving the MCID and PASS. METHODS: Data from an institutional repository of consecutive patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopic surgery with routine capsular closure for FAI that had failed nonsurgical management between January 2012 and January 2014 were prospectively collected and analyzed. Of 474 patients during the enrollment period, 386 (81.4%) patients were available for a minimum 2-year follow-up. Demographics, radiographic measurements, intraoperative characteristics, and patient-reported outcome scores were collected. The primary outcome measure was achieving published thresholds for the MCID and PASS for the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living (ADL) in patients with FAI. The HOS-Sport-Specific Subscale (SSS), complications, and reoperations were secondary outcome measures. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with achieving the MCID and PASS. RESULTS: At a minimum of 2-year follow-up, the patients had statistically significant improvements in all patient-reported outcomes (HOS-ADL, HOS-SSS, and modified Harris Hip Score [mHHS]; P < .001 for all), with a 1.2% rate of revision hip arthroscopic surgery and 1.7% rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty. The MCID was achieved by 78.8% of patients for the HOS-ADL, and the PASS was achieved by 62.5% for the HOS-ADL. Younger age ( P = .008), Tönnis grade 0 ( P = .022), and lower preoperative HOS-ADL score ( P < .001) were associated with successfully achieving the MCID for the HOS-ADL. Younger age ( P < .001), larger medial joint space width ( P = .028), and higher preoperative HOS-ADL score ( P < .001) were associated with achieving the PASS for the HOS-ADL. Younger age ( P < .001), lower body mass index ( P = .006), non-workers' compensation status ( P = .020), and lower preoperative HOS-SSS score ( P < .001) were associated with achieving the MCID for the HOS-SSS. Younger age ( P = .001), Tönnis grade 0 ( P = .014), running ( P = .008), and higher preoperative HOS-SSS score ( P < .001) were associated with achieving the PASS for the HOS-SSS. Overall, 49.4% of patients achieved all 4 clinically significant outcomes: both the MCID and PASS for the HOS-ADL and HOS-SSS. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery with routine capsular closure for FAI experienced clinically significant outcomes that met the MCID or PASS criteria, with low rates of revision and conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Factors associated with these successful outcomes on multivariate analyses included younger age with a normal joint space. Patients with lower preoperative HOS scores were more likely to achieve the MCID, whereas patients with higher preoperative HOS scores were more likely to achieve the PASS.

Patient Preference Before and After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Which Is More Important, Pain Relief or Strength Return?

Our understanding of patients' desired outcomes and expectations of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) is limited, particularly regarding the importance of pain relief and strength return relative to each other. We conducted a study of patient's ratings of the importance of pain relief and strength return after ARCR. Before undergoing surgery, 60 patients completed a shoulder questionnaire on which they assessed severity of symptoms and rated, on a 10-point scale, the importance of postoperative improvements in pain relief and strength return. After surgery, they completed the same questionnaire, again rating the importance of pain relief and strength return. About 50% of the patients valued pain relief and strength return equally before and after ARCR. However, overall patient ratings were higher for strength return over pain relief, both before surgery, mean (SD), 9.2 (2.1) vs 8.6 (2.3) (P = .02), and afterward, at a follow-up of 5.2 (0.2) years, 8.9 (1.9) vs 8.2 (3.1) (P = .03). This significant preference for strength return held irrespective of sex, age, active sports involvement, preoperative self-assessed pain score, and subjective shoulder weakness. Before surgery, increasing age was associated with a stronger preference for pain relief (r = 0.33, P = .01), and retirees preferred pain relief over strength return. These results show the patterns of patient preference for pain relief and strength return after ARCR. Improved understanding of these patients' expectations will allow meaningful changes in patient satisfaction.

A FOUR-PHASE PHYSICAL THERAPY REGIMEN FOR RETURNING ATHLETES TO SPORT FOLLOWING HIP ARTHROSCOPY FOR FEMOROACETABULAR IMPINGEMENT WITH ROUTINE CAPSULAR CLOSURE.

Hip preservation surgery has become more common over the past decade and is now a preferred treatment modality for an increasingly diverse array of pathology in the young, active patient with hip pain. In particular, hip arthroscopy has become an increasingly popular treatment choice for active patients diagnosed with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Appropriate postoperative rehabilitation is critical for overall patient success and optimal long-term outcome. As surgical techniques continue to evolve, rehabilitation protocols must adapt to accommodate changes in the surgical procedure and ultimately provide the safest and fastest recovery of function for the patient. One such surgical modification has been the incorporation of routine capsular closure as part of the treatment of FAI in the young, active patient. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to present a four-phase rehabilitation protocol for returning to sport following arthroscopic correction of FAI with routine capsular closure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Unilateral or Bilateral Hip Arthroscopic Surgery: Age- and Sex-Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: A significant number of patients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) have bilateral deformities and may require surgery for both hips. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes between patients who underwent bilateral hip arthroscopic surgery to a matched cohort of patients who underwent unilateral hip arthroscopic surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a single fellowship-trained surgeon from January 2012 to January 2014 and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years were evaluated. Patients who underwent staged bilateral hip arthroscopic surgery were identified and matched 1:2 to patients who underwent unilateral hip arthroscopic surgery based on age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). Demographic, preoperative, and postoperative variables were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Forty-three patients in the bilateral group were matched with 86 patients in the unilateral group based on sex (24 female [56%] vs 48 female [56%], respectively; P > .99), age (28.6 ± 10.8 years vs 28.9 ± 10.8 years, respectively; P = .88), and BMI (24.8 ± 5.8 kg/m2 vs 24.8 ± 4.0 kg/m2, respectively; P = .98). There were no significant preoperative demographic or radiographic differences between the groups. Both groups demonstrated significant preoperative to postoperative improvements in the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) ( P < .0001 for all). When compared with patients in the unilateral group, patients who underwent bilateral hip arthroscopic surgery had less improvement in mHHS and pain scores. Sixty-five (76%) patients in the unilateral group achieved the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the mHHS compared with 21 (49%) in the bilateral group ( P = .03), while 64 (74%) patients achieved the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the mHHS compared with 22 (51%) in the bilateral group ( P = .02). Patients in the bilateral group with greater than 10 months between surgical procedures had lower postoperative HOS-ADL scores ( P = .04) and lower improvement in pain and HOS-SS scores ( P < .0001 and P = .05, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent unilateral and bilateral hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI had improved functional outcomes after 2 years. However, patients who underwent bilateral hip arthroscopic surgery had less improvement in their mHHS and pain scores compared with those who underwent unilateral hip arthroscopic surgery but no differences in HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, or satisfaction scores. Patients in the bilateral group with longer than 10 months between surgical procedures had lower outcome scores than patients who underwent their second surgical procedure within 10 months of their primary surgery.

The Influence of Body Mass Index on Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopic Surgery With Capsular Plication for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement.

BACKGROUND: It remains unknown how variations in body mass index (BMI) influence outcomes after primary hip arthroscopic surgery with capsular plication for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect that abnormal BMI (namely, overweight, obese, morbidly obese, and underweight) versus normal weight has on patient-reported clinical outcomes more than 2 years postoperatively from primary hip arthroscopic surgery with capsular plication by a single surgeon. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A clinical repository containing patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI between January 1, 2012, and January 1, 2014, with a minimum 2-year follow-up was queried. Outcome measures included the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living (ADL), HOS-Sports, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain; satisfaction, and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) for the HOS-ADL; scores were collected preoperatively and at 3 months, 1 year, and minimum 2 years postoperatively. Included patients were segregated by preoperative BMI into the following categories: underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), normal (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2), obese (30.0-34.9 kg/m2), and morbidly obese (≥35.0 kg/m2). A multivariate logistic regression model controlling for patient demographics and disease severity was used to identify independent associations between BMI categories and outcomes. A Bonferroni adjustment lowered the threshold for significance to P < .01. RESULTS: There were 409 hips in 381 patients appropriate for study inclusion: 7 underweight, 197 normal BMI, 130 overweight, 31 obese, and 16 morbidly obese. The mean age was 33.1 ± 12.1 years, with 232 (61%) female patients. At 2 years postoperatively, significant differences in the trend among HOS-ADL, HOS-Sports, and mHHS scores were evident, with normal BMI patients, followed by underweight patients, demonstrating greater scores than their overweight, obese, and morbidly obese counterparts. Obese patients demonstrated lower satisfaction scores than normal BMI patients. Overweight, obese, and morbidly obese patients had lower improvements in VAS pain scores compared with normal BMI patients. Increasing BMI (not subdivided into the 5 BMI categories) was associated with a higher infection risk (mean BMI for infections: 32.3 ± 9.8 kg/m2 vs mean BMI for noninfections: 25.2 ± 4.8 kg/m2; P = .0035). However, with multivariate analysis, no significant differences in patient clinical outcomes between the BMI categories met the threshold for significance. Among obese patients (BMI ≥30.0 kg/m2), no specific risk factors were found to be significantly associated with decreases in the change in VAS, HOS-ADL, HOS-Sports, mHHS, satisfaction, or PASS for the HOS-ADL scores. However, because of the small cohort sizes at the extremes of the BMI categories, this analysis may have been underpowered to identify a significant difference in underweight or morbidly obese patients. CONCLUSION: In the current cohort, there were multiple potential confounding variables, and while some clinical differences were observed initially (higher HOS-ADL, HOS-Sports, and mHHS scores for normal BMI patients than overweight and obese patients at 2 years postoperatively; lower satisfaction scores for obese patients than normal BMI patients; and lower improvement in VAS pain scores for overweight, obese, and morbidly obese patients when compared with normal BMI patients), after multivariate analysis, no associations were observed between BMI and clinical outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery with capsular plication for FAI.

Do Patients With Borderline Dysplasia Have Inferior Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopic Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement Compared With Patients With Normal Acetabular Coverage?

BACKGROUND: The literature contains conflicting reports regarding whether outcomes of hip arthroscopic surgery for patients with borderline dysplasia are inferior to outcomes in patients with normal acetabular coverage. PURPOSE: To assess differences in the outcomes of hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in groups of patients with borderline dysplasia and normal coverage. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A registry of consecutive patients who had undergone primary hip arthroscopic surgery with capsular plication for FAI between January 2012 and January 2014 were divided based on the preoperative lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) into 2 distinct groups: (1) borderline dysplasia (LCEA 18°-25°) and (2) normal acetabular coverage (LCEA 25.1°-40°). There were 36 patients in the borderline dysplastic group and 312 patients in the normal coverage group. The primary outcome measure was the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures included the HOS-Sports and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS). RESULTS: The mean preoperative LCEA differed significantly between groups (23.4° ± 1.5° for borderline dysplastic, 32.5° ± 3.8° for normal coverage; P < .001). The borderline dysplastic group had a higher percentage of female patients than the normal coverage group (27/36 [75%] vs 177/312 [57%], respectively; P = .048). There were no differences in other preoperative demographics and radiographic parameters. At a minimum 2 years after hip arthroscopic surgery (mean follow-up, 2.6 ± 0.6 years), both groups demonstrated significant improvements in all patient-reported outcome scores ( P < .001 in all cases). There were no significant differences between the borderline dysplastic and normal coverage groups in final outcome scores, score improvements, or percentage of patients experiencing clinically significant improvements. One patient in the borderline dysplastic group (3%) underwent revision hip arthroscopic surgery, and none underwent total hip arthroplasty during the follow-up period. There were no differences between the borderline dysplastic and normal coverage groups with regard to subsequent surgery. Female patients in the borderline dysplastic group had greater improvements in the mean HOS-ADL (25.9 ± 16.3 vs 10.8 ± 18.5, respectively; P = .05) and mHHS (27.9 ± 12.9 vs 8.1 ± 19.0, respectively; P = .005) compared with male patients in the borderline dysplastic group, but male and female patients did not differ in outcomes for the normal coverage group. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for FAI with capsular plication experienced significant clinical improvements with low rates of subsequent surgery, regardless of whether their acetabulum had borderline dysplasia or normal coverage.

Hip Arthroscopy for Atypical Posterior Hip Pain: A Comparative Matched-Pair Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) most commonly manifests as anterior groin pain. Patients occasionally have posterior pain but otherwise have clinical and radiographic evidence of FAI. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of hip arthroscopy for FAI in patients with atypical posterior pain versus a matched group with the typical anterior pain presentation. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAI were identified from a clinical repository between January 2012 and 2014. Of 503 patients during the study period, 31 (6.2%) had posterior hip or buttock pain reproduced with flexion, adduction, and internal rotation (FADDIR) and were classified as "atypical," while those with anterior hip or groin pain were classified as "typical." Atypical patients were matched in a 1:2 cohort to the typical group based on sex, age, and body mass index (BMI). Postoperative patient-reported outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Hip Outcome Scores with Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Sports-Specific (HOS-SS) subscales. RESULTS: Of the 31 atypical patients, 28 (90.3%) were available for a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean ± SD, 2.6 ± 0.6 years). These patients were matched with 56 typical patients. No differences were noted between typical and atypical cohorts in preoperative demographic or radiographic parameters. Postoperatively, both groups demonstrated significant improvements in mHHS (atypical 60.1 ± 12.4 to 78.8 ± 12.9; typical 60.0 ± 12.3 to 76.9 ± 13.6; P < .001), HOS-ADL (atypical 68.5 ± 17.0 to 88.6 ± 11.0; typical 69.2 ± 17.1 to 86.8 ± 14.7; P < .001), and HOS-SS (atypical 42.0 ± 25.5 to 71.0 ± 26.2; typical 44.4 ± 24.9 to 71.3 ± 27.3; P < .001). No differences were found in 2-year score improvements between the atypical and typical cohorts (mHHS 18.7 ± 13.4 vs 16.9 ± 13.1, P = .48; HOS-ADL 20.1 ± 16.8 vs 17.6 ± 14.6, P = .19; HOS-SS 29.0 ± 30.2 vs 26.9 ± 27.3, P = .93). Also, no significant differences were found in VAS pain improvement (5.0 ± 3.2 vs 5.6 ± 2.8, P = .56) or postoperative satisfaction (79.5 ± 5.5 vs 77.5 ± 4.1, P = .78). CONCLUSION: Atypical posterior hip pain is an uncommon presentation of FAI. Patients demonstrate similar significant improvements after hip arthroscopy in outcome scores, postoperative pain, and satisfaction compared with patients who have classic anterior groin pain.

Amateur and Recreational Athletes Return to Sport at a High Rate Following Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement.

PURPOSE: To compare the return-to-play rates, patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores, and satisfaction between high-level amateur athletes and recreational athletes and to evaluate for differences in ability to return to sport in these groups based on patient-related and sport-related characteristics. METHODS: Clinical data were retrieved for 66 (26 male/40 female) consecutive athletes undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. Athletes were classified as high-level amateur or recreational. Athletes were also divided into 6 distinct sporting categories based on the physical demands on the hip. Preoperative and 2-year PROs including a sport-specific questionnaire, modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS), and Hip Outcome Scores with Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Sports-Specific (HOS-SS) subscales were collected. RESULTS: Of the 66 patients, 49 were recreational and 17 were high-level amateur athletes (10 high school and 7 collegiate). High-level athletes were significantly younger than recreational athletes (18.4 ± 2.3 years vs 29.7 ± 6.8 years; P < .001). After 2 years, all PROs had improved significantly, with no differences between the 2 athletic groups. There was a high overall rate of return for both recreational and high-level amateur athletes (94% vs 88%; P = .60). Increasing preoperative withdrawal time from sport prior to surgery was associated with decreased HOS-SS (r = 0.33; P = .04) and MHHS scores (r = 0.02; P = .02). Overall, athletes who had withdrawn from sport for greater than 8 months before surgery returned to sport significantly more slowly (P = .01). Increasing body mass index (BMI) was associated with lower improvements in HOS (r = 0.26; P = .04) and MHHS scores (r = 0.38; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Recreational athletes, despite being significantly older than their high-level counterparts, return to play at a similar high rate and with comparable PROs. Increasing preoperative cessation time from sport significantly prolongs return to sport. Additionally, increasing preoperative cessation from sport and higher preoperative BMI were associated with decreased improvements in PROs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.