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.

Editorial Commentary: Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy and Periacetabular Osteotomy Treat Both the Cause and the Effects of Hip Dysplasia: The Best of Both Worlds.

In the management of true hip dysplasia, the bony deformity is nearly always accompanied by, and often causal of, intra-articular pathology. It is strongly recommended to conduct a comprehensive preoperative evaluation as well as arthroscopic evaluation and treatment of coexisting hip joint conditions prior to performing an open Bernese periacetabular osteotomy. The osteotomy improves coverage of the femoral head and corrects the abnormal joint mechanics and loading patterns, which result in cartilage damage and subsequent osteoarthritis. Arthroscopy allows treatment of the intra-articular pathology. Combining the hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy procedures into a single surgical intervention, performed by either a single surgeon or a collaborative surgical team, allows us to address both the cause and the effects of dysplasia. This once-controversial combined technique has become a standard practice in the field with widespread adoption.

Acetabular Labral Reconstruction Does Not Demonstrate Superior Biomechanical Properties Compared to Labral Repair or Intact Native Labrum but Is Superior to Labral Excision: A Systematic Review of Cadaveric Studies.

PURPOSE: To systematically review and compare biomechanical properties of labral reconstruction to labral repair, intact native labrum, and labral excision in cadaveric studies. METHODS: A search of the PubMed and Embase databases was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and checklist. Cadaveric studies focused on hip biomechanics related to intact labrum, labral repair, labral reconstruction, labral augmentation, and labral excision were included. Investigated parameters included biomechanical data measures, such as distraction force, distance to suction seal rupture, peak negative pressure, contact area, and fluid efflux. Review articles, duplicates, technique reports, case reports, opinion articles, articles written in a language other than English, clinical studies focusing on patient-reported outcomes, studies performed in animals, and articles with no abstract available were also excluded. RESULTS: Fourteen cadaveric biomechanical studies were included that compared labral reconstruction to labral repair (4 studies), labral reconstruction to labral excision (4 studies); and evaluation of distractive force of the labrum (3 studies), the distance to suction seal rupture (3 studies), fluid dynamics (2 studies), displacement at peak force (1 study), and stability ratio (1 study). Data pooling was not performed because of methodological heterogenicity of the studies. Labral reconstruction did not outperform labral repair in restoring the hip suction seal or any other biomechanical property. Labral repair significantly prevented greater fluid efflux when compared to labral reconstruction. Labral repair and reconstruction improved the distractive stability of the hip fluid seal from the labral tear and labral excision stage, respectively. Furthermore, labral reconstruction demonstrated to have better biomechanical properties than labral excision. CONCLUSIONS: In cadaveric studies, labral repair or intact native labrum was biomechanically more superior than labral reconstruction; however, labral reconstruction can restore acetabular labral biomechanical properties and was biomechanically superior to labral excision. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In cadaveric models, labral repair outperforms segmental labral reconstruction in preserving the hip suction seal; nonetheless, segmental labral reconstruction biomechanically outperforms labral excision at time 0.

Defining the Percent Thresholds for Achieving the Maximum Outcome Improvement of the Modified Harris Hip Score, the Non-Arthritic Hip Score, the Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale, the Visual Analog Scale for Pain, and the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 in Revision Hip Arthroscopy at Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To determine the respective percent thresholds for achieving the maximal outcome improvement (MOI) for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), the Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SSS), the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) that were associated with satisfaction following revision hip arthroscopy, and to identify predictors for achieving the MOI. METHODS: An anchor question was provided to patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy between April 2017 and July 2020. Patients were included for the final analysis if they answered the anchor question and had minimum 2-year follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine the thresholds for the percentage of the MOI predictive of satisfaction. A P-value of < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In total, 318 patients underwent revision hip arthroscopy. Of those patients, 292 (91.8%) had minimum 2-year follow-up. Of this cohort, 68 answered the anchor question, with 49 (72.1%) female and 19 (27.9%) male patients. The mean age, and body mass index time were 32.9 ± 13 years and 25.4 ± 5.1, respectively. It was determined that 42.1%, 50%, 48.1%, 50%, and 50% of MOI were the thresholds for maximal predictability of satisfaction for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SS, VAS for pain, and the iHOT-12, respectively. The presence of unaddressed subspine impingement was a significant predictor for achieving the MOI threshold for the VAS (odds ratio 1.40; 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.95; P = 0.0273). CONCLUSIONS: Following revision hip arthroscopy, the percent thresholds for achieving the MOI at a minimum 2-year follow-up for the mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SS, VAS for pain, and iHOT-12 were 42.1%, 50%, 48.1%, 50%, and 50.9%, respectively. Addressing residual subspine impingement was identified as significant positive predictor for achieving the MOI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case-series.

Dancers Show Significant Improvement in Outcomes and Favorable Return-to-Dance Rates After Primary Hip Arthroscopy With Femoral Head Cartilage Status Being a Predictor of Secondary Surgical Procedures at Mid-Term Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To report minimum 5-year follow-up patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) scores and return-to-dance rates in dancers who underwent primary hip arthroscopy and to identify predictors of secondary surgical procedures. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between May 2010 and June 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they participated in dance at any level 1 year prior to surgery and had preoperative and minimum 5-year follow-up scores consisting of the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale pain score. The exclusion criteria were previous hip conditions, previous ipsilateral hip surgery, Tönnis grade greater than 1, or lateral center-edge angle less than 18°. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was reported. Dancers who discontinued dance for reasons other than pain in the operative hip were excluded from the return-to-dance analysis. A logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of secondary surgical procedures. RESULTS: Fifty-one hips (48 female dancers) were included. The average age and average follow-up period were 29.8 ± 17.2 years and 79.1 ± 23.2 months, respectively. Improvement in all PROM scores (P < .001) was reported. Achievement rates of the MCID for the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, and visual analog scale pain score were 83.3%, 85.7%, and 85.7%, respectively. Revision hip arthroscopy was performed in 5 dancers (9.8%). Conversion to total hip arthroplasty was performed in 4 dancers (7.8%). The return-to-dance rate was 78.6%, with 57.6% returning to the preinjury performance level or a higher level. Higher femoral head Outerbridge grade was identified as a predictor of secondary surgical procedures (P = .045; odds ratio, 6.752 [95% confidence interval, 1.043-43.688]). CONCLUSIONS: After primary hip arthroscopy, dancers experienced significant improvement in all PROM scores collected and achieved the MCID at a high rate at minimum 5-year follow-up. The return-to-dance rate in dancers who did not discontinue dance because of lifestyle transitions was 78.6%, with 57.6% returning to the preinjury performance level or a higher level. Higher femoral head Outerbridge grade was found to be a predictor of secondary surgical procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes for Periacetabular Osteotomy and Hip Arthroscopy With Capsular Plication in the Setting of Borderline Hip Dysplasia: A Propensity-Matched Multicenter Study With Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To compare minimum 5-year patient-reported outcome measures after hip arthroscopy (HA) and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for borderline hip dysplasia. METHODS: Hips with a lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and less than 25° that underwent either PAO or HA were selected from 2 institutions. The exclusion criteria were as follows: LCEA less than 18°, Tönnis osteoarthritis grade greater than 1, prior hip surgical procedures, active inflammatory disease, Workers' Compensation, and concomitant surgery. Patients underwent propensity matching based on age, sex, body mass index, and Tönnis osteoarthritis grade. Patient-reported outcome measures included the modified Harris Hip Score, as well as calculation of the minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptom state, and maximum outcome improvement satisfaction threshold. Preoperative radiographic predictors included comparison of the Femoro-epiphyseal Acetabular Roof index and ligamentum teres lesions. RESULTS: A total of 28 PAO patients underwent propensity matching to 49 HA patients. The 2 groups were similar in terms of mean age, sex, preoperative body mass index, and LCEA. The PAO group had a longer mean follow-up period (95.8 months vs 81.3 months, P = .001). The mean Femoro-epiphyseal Acetabular Roof index was significantly lower preoperatively in the HA group (P < .001). The 2 groups showed similar and significant improvements in the mean modified Harris Hip Score from preoperatively to latest follow-up (P < .001). The relative risk of subsequent surgery in the PAO group was 3.49 (P = .024), mostly attributed to hardware removal (25%). The revision rate was 3.6% in the PAO group and 8.2% in the HA group (P = .65). One patient in the PAO group required revision HA for intra-articular adhesions. Three of the patients requiring revision in the HA group underwent PAO because of persistent pain, and one underwent revision HA alone. Conversion to total hip arthroplasty was required in 1 patient in the HA group and no patients in the PAO group. CONCLUSIONS: Both PAO and HA with capsular plication provide borderline hip dysplasia patients with clinically significant improvements and low revision rates at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective, comparative therapeutic trial.

Editorial Commentary: Treatment of Concomitant Intra-Articular Pathology in Patients With Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome Is Indicated by Provocative Impingement or Instability Physical Examination and Ultrasound-Guided Analgesic Injection Testing.

Endoscopic surgery can be used to address peritrochanteric pathology in patients with greater trochanteric pain syndrome. During management of these patients, surgeons must decide whether adjunctive hip arthroscopy to treat concomitant intra-articular pathology (such as labral tears or chondral lesions) is required, because the prevalence of intra-articular findings may be greater than the clinical significance. A thorough history and physical examination can help distinguish whether the symptoms are arising from a peritrochanteric issue (e.g., gluteal tendinopathy, trochanteric bursitis, external coxa saltans) versus an intra-articular pain generator. Increased symptoms with provocative impingement or instability testing indicate adjunctive hip arthroscopy to address intra-articular abnormalities. In addition, an ultrasound-guided analgesic injection into the hip joint or peritrochanteric region may aid in diagnosis. A patient with partial symptomatic relief from separate injections into both areas is a classic presentation and consistent with a mixed-picture of peritrochanteric and intra-articular pathology, which may be addressed with a combined endoscopic and arthroscopic approach.

Editorial Commentary: Evaluate for the Beighton Score and Additional Radiographic Signs of Instability Prior to Proceeding With Hip Arthroscopy in Patients With Combined Borderline Hip Dysplasia and Excessive Femoral Anteversion.

Femoral version abnormalities have been increasingly recognized as a key factor in the pathogenesis of nonarthritic hip pain. Excessive femoral anteversion (EFA), defined as femoral anteversion greater than 20°, has been postulated to create unstable alignment of the hip, which is exacerbated in patients with concomitant borderline hip dysplasia (BHD). The optimal treatment algorithm for hip pain in EFA-BHD patients remains debated, with some surgeons advocating against arthroscopic procedures in isolation owing to the combined instability due to the femoral and acetabular abnormalities. When determining the treatment approach for an EFA-BHD patient, clinicians should discern whether the patient is presenting with symptoms due to femoroacetabular impingement versus hip instability. When addressing symptomatic hip instability, clinicians are encouraged to evaluate for the Beighton score and additional radiographic factors (other than the lateral center-edge angle) suggestive of instability, such as a Tönnis angle greater than 10°, coxa valga, and deficient anterior or posterior acetabular wall coverage. Because the combination of these additional instability findings with EFA-BHD may portend an inferior outcome after arthroscopic treatment in isolation, an open procedure such as periacetabular osteotomy can be a more reliable treatment option for symptomatic hip instability in this cohort.

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.

Lateral to Medial Joint Space Ratio is Predictive of Survivorship After Primary Hip Arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: To assess whether preoperative joint space measures would be predictive of survivorship in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). METHODS: Data on consecutive patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between February 2008 and February 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. To be eligible for final analysis, patients were required to have preoperative radiographs for joint space measurements and data indicating conversion to a total hip arthroplasty (THA), hip resurfacing, or neither; at a minimum of 2 years after primary hip arthroscopy. Survivorship following HA was defined as remaining conversion free and served as the primary outcome. A multivariate logistic regression analysis and receiver operator curve (ROC) were used to evaluate the correlation between joint space measurements and survivorship following HA. RESULTS: A total of 1,885 primary arthroscopy cases were included in this study. The multivariate regression analysis found preoperative lateral-to-medial joint space ratio (L/M ratio) to be the strongest predictive factor of survivorship after primary hip arthroscopy (OR = 2.084, CI95% = 1.239-3.503; P = .006). The ROC curve for the model demonstrated acceptable discrimination with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.792. Patients with an L/M ratio ≥0.75 had a survivorship rate of 91.7% compared to a rate of 75% for patients with an L/M ratio <0.75 (OR: 3.68). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that, of the factors evaluated in this study, the most significant factor in predicting survivorship at 2 years after undergoing primary hip arthroscopy was a larger lateral-to-medial joint space ratio. This may suggest an initiation of primary arthritis at the edge-loading area of the lateral acetabulum. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative observation study.

Periacetabular Osteotomy in Athletes With Symptomatic Hip Dysplasia Allows for Participation in Low-, Moderate-, and High-Impact Sports, With Greater Than 70% Return to Sport for Competitive Athletes: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature and report the rate of return to sport (RTS) in athletes following periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for symptomatic hip dysplasia. METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for clinical studies reporting on athletes undergoing PAO surgery for symptomatic hip dysplasia. A quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index of Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) grading system. Data collection included study characteristics, demographics, radiographic measurements, rate and timing of RTS, baseline and most recent patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and subsequent surgeries. RESULTS: Six studies met inclusion criteria with 341 patients undergoing PAO. There were 2 level III and 4 level IV studies, with an average MINORS score of 11. Preoperative and postoperative lateral center edge angles ranged from 8° to 18° and 23° to 41.3°, respectively. One study reported solely on dancers with a 63% rate of RTS at 1 year postoperatively. Two other studies reported RTS of 80% and 82% for multiple sports, with slightly lower rates (73% and 78%) in competitive athletes. Three studies demonstrated a comparable distribution of sports participation, from the preoperative to postoperative period, in low-impact (61.4% to 72.1% and 63.7% to 85.7%), moderate-impact (10.3% to 21.0% and 4.3% to 25.4%), and high-impact (8.5% to 17.6% and 5.1% to 10.8%) sports. Three studies reported time to RTS after PAO, ranging from 8.8 to 12.8 months. Of the 3 studies noting reasons for not returning to sport, concerns related to the operative hip ranged from 36.4% to 67%. Of the studies that reported both preoperative and postoperative PROs, improvements in all values were observed, with modified Harris Hip Scores and Hip Disability Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores at most recent follow-up ranging from 81 to 95 and 72 to 93, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In athletes with symptomatic hip dysplasia undergoing PAO, postoperative participation in low-, moderate-, and high-impact sports was observed, with greater than 70% RTS for competitive athletes. These findings suggest that PAO, with appropriate indications, is an efficacious treatment option in this active patient population with severe dysplasia. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of level III and IV studies.

Hip Capsular Repair Results in Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes and Survivorship: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

PURPOSE: To determine whether routine capsular closure following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in patients without dysplasia results in improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and increased survivorship rates. METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed using the Preferred Reporting for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for clinical studies reporting PROs following arthroscopic hip labral repair for FAI. A quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies grading system. Inclusion criteria consisted of comparative clinical studies investigating routine capsular closure with nonclosure in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for the treatment of FAI and labral tears. Exclusion criteria included non-English language, minimum follow-up of less than 2 years after surgery, technique articles, case reports, noncomparative case series of fewer than 10 patients, failure to report surgical technique, absence of postoperative PROs, or partial repair. Data collection included study characteristics, demographics, indications, radiographic metrics, perioperative findings, surgical technique, baseline and most recent PROs, and subsequent surgeries. RESULTS: A total of 531 articles were reviewed, of which 3 were included with 249 hips that underwent capsular repair and 157 hips that underwent capsulotomy with no repair. There were 2 Level III studies and 1 Level II study, with an average The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies score of 16.7. All studies cited FAI and labral tear as an indication for surgery. All studies demonstrated improved PROs from baseline to most recent follow-up. Postoperatively, the repair group reported modified Harris Hip Score values ranging from 80.8 to 87, whereas the nonrepair group reported scores ranging from 76 to 81.7. In addition, the repair group reported postoperative Hip Outcome Score - Sports-Specific Subscale values ranging from 68.1 to 9, whereas the nonrepair group reported scores ranging from 65.3 to 76.1. The studies also reported minimal clinically important difference for modified Harris Hip Score, with the repair group reporting percentages ranging from 71 to 100 and the nonrepair group reporting percentages ranging from 52 to 95.6. All 3 studies also observed a lower rate of hip survivorship in the nonrepair group, ranging from 94.6 to 100 in the repair group and 90.8 to 100 in the nonrepair group. There were no significant differences in the rate of revision arthroscopy between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients without dysplasia who undergo capsular repair have greater improvements in PROs and greater survivorship rates at early- and mid-term follow-up than patients who do not undergo capsular repair. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, systematic review of level II and III studies.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Improve at 2-Year Minimum Follow-Up After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To provide an updated review of recent literature on postoperative outcomes following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS), focusing on larger-population studies with a minimum 2-year follow-up published within the last 5 years. METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed, Ovid Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles were screened for clinical studies published from 2017 to 2022 with greater than 100 patients and minimum 2-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria included failure to report postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), no preoperative radiographic measurements, and surgery for pathology other than FAIS. Data collection included study characteristics, patient demographics, radiographic findings, intraoperative findings, procedures performed, postoperative PROs, and subsequent surgeries. RESULTS: Nine studies met inclusion criteria. Mean or median patient ages ranged from 32.3 to 41 years, with 4 studies reporting on greater than 50% female patients. Mean preoperative lateral center edge angles and alpha angles ranged from 30.2° to 37° and from 56.2° to 71°, respectively. Labral repairs (range 69.7%-100%) were performed more commonly than debridements (range 0%-26.3%). All studies demonstrated improved PROs at most recent follow-up. Seven studies reported mean or median modified Harris Hip Scores, with preoperative and postoperative values that ranged from 53.1 to 80 and from 67.4 to 100, respectively. Revision hip arthroscopies and conversions to hip arthroplasty ranged from 0.8% to 11.6% and from 0% to 34%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: All included studies found improvements in PROs after hip arthroscopy for FAIS at a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Conversion to total hip arthroplasty is most common in older patients at minimum 10-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.

Propensity-Matched Patients Undergoing Revision Hip Arthroscopy Older Than the Age of 40 Years Had Greater Risk of Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty Compared With Their Primary Counterparts.

PURPOSE: To report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship following revision hip arthroscopy in patients aged ≥40 years and to compare these results with a propensity-matched primary hip arthroscopy control group. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy between June 2008 and January 2019. Patients were included if they were ≥40 years of age at the time of surgery and had minimum 2-year follow-up for the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Visual Analog Scale for pain, and the Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale. Patients who had a previous hip condition, or those who lacked minimum 2-year follow-up, were excluded. The revision group was further analyzed by conducting a 1:1 propensity-matched sub-analysis to a primary hip arthroscopy control group based on age, sex, body mass index, and acetabular labrum articular disruption grade. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: Eighty-nine hips (92.7% follow-up) were included, with 66.3% being females. The mean age, body mass index, and follow-up time were 49.4 ± 8.0 years, 26.6 ± 4.1, and 62.7 ± 38.5 months, respectively. Significant improvement in all PROs (P < .001) was reported, and 71.8%, 58 74.4%, and 65.2% achieved the minimal clinically important difference for the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale, respectively. Eighty-seven revision hips were successfully propensity-matched to 87 primary hips. Both groups reported similar improvement for all PROs, but the relative risk of conversion to total hip arthroplasty was 2.63 times greater (95% confidence interval 1.20-5.79) for the revision group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients aged ≥40 years who underwent revision hip arthroscopy reported significant improvement in all PROs at a mean follow-up of 62.7 months with favorable rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference. When compared to the propensity-matched control group, both achieved similar rates of improvement, but the revision group was 2.63 times more likely to convert to total hip arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. case-control study.

Durable Outcomes After Hip Labral Reconstruction at Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review and report the mid- to long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after hip labral reconstruction. METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for clinical studies reporting mid- to long-term PROs at minimum 5-year follow-up after arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction. A quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index of Non-Randomized Studies grading system. Data collection included study characteristics, demographics, indications, radiographic metrics, perioperative findings, surgical technique, baseline and most recent PROs, and subsequent surgeries. RESULTS: Four studies met inclusion criteria, with 182 hips (age range, 27.9-38.7 years) undergoing labral reconstruction in primary and revision hip surgery with minimum 5-year follow-up. There were three Level III studies and one Level IV study, with an average Methodological Index of Non-Randomized Studies score of 16.6. All studies cited labral tissue characteristics as a factor for surgical indications, including the quality and/or size of the labrum. Three studies performed segmental labral reconstructions, whereas another study used a circumferential technique. Varying grafts were selected, including hamstring autograft/allograft, ligamentum teres autograft, iliotibial band autograft, and tensor fascia lata autograft. All studies demonstrated improved PROs from baseline to most recent follow-up, with 4 studies reporting modified Harris Hip Score values that increased from baseline (range, 58.9-66.8) to most recent follow-up (range, 80.1-86.3). After labral reconstruction, rates of revision arthroscopy ranged from 4.8% to 13.3% and conversion to total hip arthroplasty ranged from 1.6% to 27%. CONCLUSIONS: Improved PROs were observed in all studies at minimum 5-year follow-up, suggesting that labral reconstruction can offer durable results beyond short-term follow-up. Although surgical indications for all studies included labral tissue characteristics, differing graft selection and surgical techniques were used across studies, limiting the ability to determine an optimal treatment approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Patients Who Underwent Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement with Acetabular Microfracture Show 77% Survivorship at 10-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To report minimum 10-year follow-up survivorship, defined as non-conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), and patient-reported outcome scores (PROS) after primary hip arthroscopy with acetabular microfracture in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and acetabular chondral lesions, respectively. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed on all patients who underwent a primary hip arthroscopy and received an acetabular microfracture between June 2009 and January 2011. Patients with a minimum 10-year follow-up for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were included. If available, the minimum 10-year follow-up for the Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale was reported. The demographics, intraoperative findings, surgical procedures, PROS, rate of achieving the minimal clinical important difference (MCID), and secondary surgeries were analyzed and reported. RESULTS: Twenty-two hips (20 patients) were included in the study, and the mean follow-up time was 124.5 ± 2.2 months. There were 17 hips (77.3%) from males and 5 hips (22.7%) from females. The average patient age at the time of surgery was 42.3 years ± 9.6. All patients on average experienced statistically significant improvement (P < .05) between preoperative and minimum 10-year follow-up scores for all PROs. In total, 77.3% of the patients did not require conversion to THA. Additionally, 83.3% of the patients achieved the MCID for the mHHS, NAHS, and VAS for pain. CONCLUSION: At a minimum 10-year follow-up, survivorship of 77.3% was reported for patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with acetabular microfracture for the treatment of FAIS and focal/full-thickness acetabular cartilage lesions. Further, in the patients that did not require THA conversion, significant improvement in all PROS was demonstrated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case-series study.

Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome in Adolescents Improves Outcomes and Clinical Benefit Achievement Rates at Short-Term Follow-Up: A Multicenter Analysis.

PURPOSE: To report minimum 2-year follow-up patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) and rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), the patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), and the maximal outcome improvement (MOI) on adolescents following primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Second, to determine risk factors for revision surgery. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from two high-volume hip arthroscopy centers were retrospectively reviewed on adolescents (≤19 years old) who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between November 2008 and February 2019. Adolescents with a minimum 2-year follow-up for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were included regardless of their growth plate status. Exclusion criteria were Tönnis grade >1, lateral center edge-angle <18°, and previous ipsilateral hip surgery or conditions. Preoperative and postoperative radiographic data, MCID, PASS, MOI, secondary surgeries, and complications were reported. A multivariable survival analysis for risk factors for secondary surgery was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 287 hips (249 patients) were included (74.9% females). The mean values for age, body mass index, and follow-up were 16.3 ± 1.3 years, 22.3 ± 3.5, and 26.6 ± 9.4 months, respectively. Further, 88.9% underwent labral repair, 81.5% femoroplasty, and 85.4% capsular closure. Improvement for all PROs was reported (P < .001) with high patient satisfaction (8.8 ± 1.5). Achievement for the MCID was 71.7%, 83.0%, 68.1%, and 79.5% for the mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-12, respectively. Achievement for the PASS was 68.3% for the mHHS and 73.2% for the NAHS. The MOI for mHHS, NAHS, and VAS was 58.3%, 77.0%, and 59.6%, respectively. Rates of revision hip arthroscopy, cam recurrence, and heterotopic ossification were 5.8%, 1.7%, and 5.5%, respectively. Acetabular retroversion was found to be a risk factor for revision surgery (P = .03). CONCLUSION: The results of this multi-center study demonstrated that adolescents who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS reported significant improvement in all PROs, with satisfactory achievement rates for the MCID, PASS, MOI, and high patient satisfaction at a minimum 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective multicenter study.

High-Level Athletes With Borderline Hip Dysplasia Achieve Favorable Outcomes and Return to Sport Rates Following Primary Hip Arthroscopy: Minimum 5-Year Outcomes Comparison to a Propensity-Matched Control Group.

PURPOSE: (1) To report minimum 5-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and return to sport (RTS) rates in high-level athletes with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) following primary hip arthroscopy for labral pathology and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and (2) to compare results to a propensity-matched control group of athletes with normal acetabular coverage. METHODS: Data were reviewed for surgeries performed between February 2009 and February 2016. Patients were eligible if they underwent primary hip arthroscopy in the setting of BHD (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] 18-25°) and competed in professional, collegiate, or high school sports. Inclusion criteria were preoperative and minimum 5-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritis Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale for pain. Rates of achieving the minimal clinically importance difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), and maximum outcome improvement satisfaction threshold (MOIST) were recorded in addition to RTS. BHD athletes were matched by age at the time of surgery, sex, body mass index, Tönnis grade, follow-up time, sport type, and competition level to a control group of 58 athletes with normal acetabular coverage (LCEA 25°-40°) for comparison. RESULTS: A total of 34 BHD athletes were included with a mean follow-up of 73.6 ± 10.7 months. BHD athletes showed significant improvements in all PROs, demonstrated high RTS rates (90.0%), and achieved PASS/MCID/MOIST for mHHS (MCID: 80.0%, PASS: 93.3%, MOIST: 80.0%) and HOS-SSS (MCID: 76.7%, PASS: 73.3%) at high rates. When compared to a propensity-matched group with normal acetabular coverage, BHD athletes demonstrated similar postoperative PROs, rates of achieving psychometric thresholds, and RTS rates (P > .05). Additionally, by the latest follow-up, no athlete in either group required conversion to total hip arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: High-level athletes with BHD undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for labral pathology and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome may expect favorable midterm outcomes and high RTS rates. These results were comparable to a control group of athletes with normal coverage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

TEMPORARY REMOVAL: Favorable and Durable Outcomes at 10-Year Follow Up After Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair With Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy.

The publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal.

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.