Incidence of heterotopic ossification following hip arthroscopy is low: considerations for routine prophylaxis.

PURPOSE: This scoping review aims to map and summarise the available literature on heterotopic ossification (HO) following hip arthroscopy, with particular focus on incidence, distribution as per Brooker classification, efficacy of prophylactic measures and factors that may influence the likelihood of production of HO. METHODS: A computer-based search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Emcare, Cinahl, ISI web of science and Scopus using the terms 'heterotopic ossification' and 'hip arthroscopy'. Articles reporting heterotopic ossification following hip arthroscopy for any condition were included after two-stage title/abstract and full-text screening. RESULTS: Of the 663 articles retrieved, 45 studies were included. The proportion of patients with HO ranged from 0 to 44%. The majority of the cases were either Brooker grade I or II. Of the six studies investigating the effect of NSAID prophylaxis, five reported a significantly lower incidence of heterotopic ossification associated with its use. Weak evidence suggests that an outside-in arthroscopic approach, no capsular closure, male sex and mixed cam and pincer resection may be associated with an increased risk of HO. CONCLUSION: Although there is a large variation in rates of HO following hip arthroscopy in the current literature, the majority of studies report a low incidence. Evidence exists advocating the administration of post-operative NSAIDs to reduce the incidence of HO following hip arthroscopy. This, combined with the low risk of complications, means there is a favourable risk-benefit ratio for prophylactic NSAID used in HA. Future research should work to identify patient clinical and demographic factors which may increase the risk of development of HO, allowing clinicians to risk stratify and select only specific patients who would benefit from receiving NSAID prophylaxis.

Over one third of patients with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement display femoral or acetabular version abnormalities.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was investigate the relationship between version and torsional abnormalities of the acetabulum, femur and tibia in patients with symptomatic FAI. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines using the EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane databases. Original research articles evaluating the described version and torsional parameters in FAI were included. The MINORS criteria were used to appraise study quality and risk of bias. Mean version and torsion values were displayed using forest plots and the estimated proportion of hips displaying abnormalities in version/torsion were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 1206 articles were identified from the initial search, with 43 articles, involving 8861 hips, meeting the inclusion criteria. All studies evaluating femoral or acetabular version in FAI reported 'normal' mean version values (10-25 °). However, distribution analysis revealed that an estimated 31% and 51% of patients with FAI displayed abnormal central acetabular and femoral version, respectively. CONCLUSION: Up to 51% of patients presenting with symptomatic FAI show an abnormal femoral version, whilst up to 31% demonstrate abnormal acetabular version. This high percentage of version abnormalities highlights the importance of evaluating these parameters routinely during assessment of patients with FAI, to guide clinical decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.