Comparable Minimum 2-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Scores Between Circumferential and Segmental Labral Reconstruction for the Management of Irreparable Labral Tear and Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome in the Primary Setting: A Propensity-Matched Study.

PURPOSE: To compare minimum 2-year follow-up patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) in patients who underwent primary acetabular circumferential and segmental labral reconstruction for irreparable labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). METHODS: Data were reviewed from August 2010 to December 2017. Patients with primary labral reconstruction and 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), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were included. Circumferential and segmental reconstruction were selected in each case based on the extent of the labral pathology. Exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip surgery/conditions, dysplasia, or Tönnis grade >1. Patients were propensity matched 1:1 based on age, sex, and body mass index. Secondary surgeries were reported. The P value was set at <.05. RESULTS: In total, 144 hips were eligible, and 17 hips were lost to follow-up, leaving 127 hips (88.2%) for analysis. Eighty hips underwent a segmental reconstruction, and 47 hips underwent a circumferential reconstruction. Forty-seven hips with circumferential reconstruction were matched to 47 hips with segmental reconstruction. The average follow-up and age for the segmental and circumferential groups were 29.0 ± 7.8 and 27.9 ± 7.0 months (P = .732) and 43.1 ± 9.4 and 44.7 ± 10.2 years (P = .442) respectively. The segmental and circumferential groups were 48.9% and 51.1% female, respectively. The groups achieved significant and comparable improvement for all PROs and rates of secondary surgeries. No differences were found for achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS). The MCIDs for the segmental and circumferential groups were 76.7% and 77.8% for the mHHS, 64.9% and 77.8% for the HOS-SSS, 71.1% and 68.9% for the VAS, and 68.9% and 73.9% for the NAHS, respectively. The PASSs for the segmental and circumferential groups were 78.3% and 73.3% for the mHHS, 55.3% and 55.0% for the HOS-SSS, and 75.6% and 71.1% for the International Hip Outcome Tool 12, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At minimum 2-year follow-up, patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for either circumferential or segmental labral reconstruction for irreparable labra and FAIS reported significant improvement and similar postoperative scores for all PROs, with no difference in psychometric outcomes and rate of secondary surgeries. A customized approach, using the extent of the irreparable labral tear, seems to be an appropriate strategy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Best Practice Guidelines for Propensity Score Methods in Medical Research: Consideration on Theory, Implementation, and Reporting. A Review.

Rigorous and reproducible methodology of controlling for bias is essential for high-quality, evidence-based studies. Propensity score matching (PSM) is a valuable way to control for bias and achieve pseudo-randomization in retrospective observation studies. The purpose of this review is to 1) provide a clear conceptual framework for PSM, 2) recommend how to best report its use in studies, and 3) offer some practical examples of implementation. First, this article covers the concepts behind PSM, discusses its pros and cons, and compares it with other methods of controlling for bias, namely, hard/exact matching and regression analysis. Second, recommendations are given for what to report in a manuscript when PSM is used. Finally, a worked example is provided, which can also serve as a template for the reader's own studies. A study's conclusions are only as strong as its methods. PSM is an invaluable tool for producing rigorous and reproducible results in observational studies. The goal of this article is to give practicing clinical physicians not only a better understanding of PSM and its implications but the ability to implement it for their own studies. STUDY DESIGN: Review.

Surgeon-Specific Traction Time During Hip Arthroscopy for Primary Labral Repair Can Continue to Decrease After a Substantial Number of Surgeries.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the total traction time and traction time as a function of anchors placed (TTAP) for primary labral repair in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy by a single surgeon. METHODS: Patients were included if they received a primary labral repair with or without acetabuloplasty, chondroplasty, or ligamentum teres debridement as part of the treatment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Patients were excluded if they had a previous ipsilateral hip surgery, prior hip conditions, Tönnis grade >1, open procedures, microfracture, ligamentum teres reconstruction, or labral reconstruction. TTAP was calculated by dividing total traction time by the number of anchors placed. RESULTS: 2,350 hips met the inclusion criteria. The mean age and BMI in this cohort were 34.22 years and 25.72 kg/m2, respectively. A total traction time of 60 minutes was first achieved after 268 cases. Mean overall total traction time was 58.16 minutes (95% CI [57.35, 58.97]) and mean TTAP was 16.24 minutes (95% CI [15.93,16.55]) after 2,350 cases. Total traction time plateaued after 374 cases at 55.92 minutes, while TTAP plateaued after 487 cases at 14.93 minutes. CONCLUSION: Surgeons who introduce hip arthroscopy into their practice can expect to see improvements in traction time during the first 500 surgeries performed, as total traction time plateaued after 374 cases and TTAP plateaued after 487 cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV: case series.

Mid- to Long-Term Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To assess mid- to long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of hip arthroscopy as well as the rates of secondary surgery and to identify indications for surgery and noted predictors of failure. METHODS: A systematic review of the current literature was performed with the terms "hip arthroscopy," "outcomes," "patient-reported outcomes," "mid-term," "5-year," "long-term," and "10-year" in the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases in April of 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Data for study characteristics, patient demographics, follow-up time, indications for surgery, PROs, predictors of failure or unfavorable PROs, and rates of secondary hip preservation surgery and conversion to total hip arthroplasty were collected. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were included. Four studies were level III and 9 were level IV. In total, 1571 hips were included, and the average follow-up time ranged from 60 to 240 months. The most common indications for hip arthroscopy were labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Twelve studies reported on PROs and all reported improvement at latest follow-up. The most reported on scores were the modified Harris Hip Score, Harris Hip Score, and the Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale. When grouped based on average follow-up time, the conversion rates at the 5- and 10-year time points ranged from 3.0% to 17.9% and 2.4% to 32.5%, respectively. One study with 20-year follow-up reported a conversion rate of 41.0%. Osteoarthritis and increased age were the most cited predictors for secondary surgery or decreased PROs. CONCLUSIONS: At mid- to long-term follow-up, patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy demonstrated improvement in several PROs. There was great variability in rates for revision surgery and conversion to total hip arthroplasty. The most common indications for hip arthroscopy were labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Osteoarthritis and increased age were the most cited predictors for unfavorable outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Defining the Maximum Outcome Improvement of the Modified Harris Hip Score, the Nonarthritic Hip Score, the Visual Analog Scale For Pain, and the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 in the Arthroscopic Management for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome and Labral Tear.

PURPOSE: To determine the respective percent thresholds for achieving the maximal outcome improvement (MOI) for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) that were associated with satisfaction following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and labral tear, and to identify preoperative predictors of reaching the mHHS, NAHS, VAS, and the iHOT-12 thresholds for achieving the MOI. METHODS: An anchor question was provided to patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between April 2008 and April 2019. Patients were included if they answered the anchor question and had minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients were excluded if they had a previous ipsilateral hip surgery, a Tönnis grade >1, hip dysplasia, or a previous hip condition. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine the thresholds for the percentage of the MOI predictive of satisfaction. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of achieving the MOI threshold. RESULTS: In total, 407 hips (375 patients) were included, with 279 female patients (68.6%). The average age, body mass index, and follow-up time were 38.8 ± 13.7 years, 26.6 ± 5.8, and 51.8 ± 33.2 months, respectively. Satisfaction with the current state of their hip was reported in 77.9% (317) of the cases. It was determined that 54.8%, 52.5%, 55.5%, and 55.8% of MOI were the thresholds for maximal predictability of satisfaction for mHHS, NAHS, VAS, and iHOT-12, respectively. Predictors of achieving MOI were not identified. CONCLUSIONS: Following hip arthroscopy in the context of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and labral tear, the thresholds for achieving the MOI for the mHHS, NAHS, VAS for pain, and iHOT-12 were 54.8%, 52.5%, 55.5%, and 55.8% respectively. No preoperative predictors of achieving the MOI were identified. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case-series.

Determining Clinically Meaningful Thresholds for the Nonarthritic Hip Score in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to improve the interpretability of the Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS) by determining the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. The secondary aim was to identify variables associated with achievement of the thresholds. METHODS: Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement and completed postoperative questionnaires between August 2019 and March 2020 were included. Patients were excluded if they underwent previous ipsilateral hip surgery, underwent gluteus medius repair, or had a previous hip condition. The MCID, PASS, and SCB thresholds were calculated for the NAHS at minimum 1-, 2-, and 5-year follow-up. Distribution- and anchor-based methods with receiver operating characteristic analysis were used to determine the thresholds. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of achieving the MCID and PASS. RESULTS: The study included 343 hips with an average follow-up period of 48 months. On the basis of the distribution-based approach, the MCID was 8.7 using a method in which the standard deviation of the baseline score was divided by 2. By use of a method in which the standard deviation of the change score was divided by 2, MCID scores of 9.1, 8.3, and 12.6 resulted at a minimum of 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. The PASS thresholds for these time points were 81.9, 85.6, and 81.9. The absolute SCB thresholds were 91.9, 94.4, and 93.1 and the change score thresholds were 30.6, 24.4, and 29.3 for a minimum of 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. The preoperative NAHS was positively associated with achievement of the PASS and inversely related to achievement of the MCID. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides important clinical thresholds for the NAHS. These thresholds were determined for minimum 1-, 2-, and 5-year time points. The MCID was determined as 8.7, the PASS ranged between 81.9 and 85.6, and the absolute SCB value ranged from 91.9 to 94.4. The preoperative NAHS was found to be positively associated with achievement of the PASS and inversely related to achievement of the MCID. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Borderline Dysplastic Female Patients With Painful Internal Snapping Improve Clinical Outcomes At Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up Following Hip Arthroscopy With Femoroplasty, Labral Repair, Iliopsoas Fractional Lengthening, and Capsular Plication: A Propensity-Matched Controlled Comparison.

PURPOSES: To report minimum 2-year follow-up patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) in borderline dysplastic female patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with femoroplasty, labral repair, iliopsoas fractional lengthening, and plication of the capsule (FLIP procedure) for cam-type femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS), labral tear, and painful internal snapping and to compare these PROs to a propensity-matched borderline dysplastic control group without painful internal snapping. METHODS: Data were retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for cam-type FAIS and labral tear between September 2008 and May 2017. Females with borderline dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle of ≥18° to ≤25°) and painful internal snapping, who underwent the FLIP procedure, with minimum 2-year PROs for modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific Subscale, patient satisfaction, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were included. The group was matched 1:1 to a control group without painful internal snapping for age, sex, body-mass index (BMI), and surgical procedures. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated. P-value was set at .05. RESULTS: Seventy-four hips were included. The mean was 26.82 ± 10.49 years and 23.62 ± 4.56 kg/m2 for age and BMI, respectively. Improvement was reported for all PROs and VAS (P < .0001). Twenty-nine patients were matched. At minimum 2-year follow-up, the FLIP procedure demonstrated comparable improvement in PROs and rate of achievement of MCID to the control group. CONCLUSION: After primary hip arthroscopy and FLIP procedure, females with borderline dysplasia and painful internal snapping demonstrated significant improvement in PROs at minimum 2 years' follow-up. When compared to a propensity-matched control group without painful internal snapping, the improvement between groups was comparable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; Case-Control study.

Surgeon Experience in Hip Arthroscopy Affects Surgical Time, Complication Rate, and Reoperation Rate: A Systematic Review on the Learning Curve.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to (1) identify the reported learning curves associated with hip arthroscopy and (2) evaluate the effect of the stated learning curves on outcomes, such as complication rates, surgical and traction time, reoperation rates, and patient-reported outcome score (PRO) improvements. METHODS: Two independent reviewers screened the PubMed-MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library electronic databases from inception to January 2020 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The following search algorithm was used: "hip arthroscopy" paired with "learning curve," "competence," "experience," "performance," and "motor skills." Data regarding study characteristics, patient demographic characteristics, PROs, and learning-curve analyses were collected. RESULTS: We identified 15 studies that reported the impact of the learning curve on surgical progress or clinical outcome measures. Measures of the surgical process included surgical and traction time, as well as fluoroscopy time, whereas clinical outcome measures encompassed PROs, complication rates, and reoperation rates. Three studies reported that the learning curve plateaued at 30 cases, but other studies suggested cutoff points ranging from 20 to 519. Operative time (75-119 minutes vs 45-99 minutes), traction time (55-127 minutes vs 54-112 minutes), complication rates (0.5%-43.3% vs 0.5%-18.0%), revision arthroscopy rates (3.3%-10% vs 1.0%-4.2%), and rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (12.2%-22.5% vs 1.5%-3.7%) decreased as surgeons gained more experience. Favorable PROs were observed throughout the surgeons' experience. CONCLUSIONS: Progression along the learning curve of hip arthroscopy led to decreases in complication rates, surgical and traction time, and reoperation rates. PROs benefited from surgery throughout the learning curve. Currently, there exists a wide spread of cutoff numbers proposed to achieve proficiency, ranging from 20 to over 500. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.

Arthroscopic Ligamentum Teres Reconstruction: Minimum 2-Year Patient-Reported Outcomes With Subanalysis of Patients With Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome.

PURPOSE: To report on minimum 2-year outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic ligamentum teres reconstruction (LTR). METHODS: Our institutional registry was retrospectively reviewed for all patients undergoing LTR between December 2012 and February 2016. LTR was indicated for a fully torn or dysfunctional ligamentum teres with symptomatic multidirectional instability not treatable by osteotomy or capsular plication alone. Demographic data, preoperative clinical and radiographic measures, and intraoperative data were recorded. Patient-reported outcome measures including the modified Harris Hip Score, the Non-Arthritic Hip Score, a visual analog scale score for pain, and patient satisfaction were recorded preoperatively and annually postoperatively. Revision arthroscopies and conversions to total hip arthroplasty were recorded. RESULTS: Twelve reconstruction procedures were performed in 10 patients during the study period. Minimum 2-year follow-up was available for 9 patients (11 hips). The mean follow-up time was 44.27 months (range, 24-72 months). There were 7 female and 2 male patients, and the mean age was 30.34 years (range, 17.23-43.68 years). Two hips underwent conversion to total hip arthroplasty at a mean of 21.12 months. For the remaining patients, significant improvements were observed in the modified Harris Hip Score (from 44.1 to 71.8), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (from 47.5 to 78.6), and visual analog scale score (from 7.8 to 3.6) (P < .05). The average patient satisfaction rating was 7.88 (range, 4-10). Subanalysis of 5 patients (7 hips) with a diagnosis of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome showed a higher failure rate in this group. CONCLUSIONS: Although LTRs are indicated and performed only in a select group of patients, the procedure can provide meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes, pain reduction, and patient satisfaction. However, most patients undergoing LTR at present have underlying factors that significantly mitigate their prognosis, such as Ehlers-Danlos syndrome or failed previous surgery. Because these patients represent a subset of patients with complex hip pathologies in whom treatment is difficult, the expectations of surgery should be set accordingly. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study, case series.

Indications and Outcomes of Secondary Hip Procedures After Failed Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: (1) To identify present indications for secondary procedures in patients with failed hip arthroscopy and (2) to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of the secondary procedures, including revision arthroscopy, periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), and total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: Study groups included patients who had a secondary procedure after failed previous hip arthroscopy whereas the control groups were patients who had a primary procedure but did not require a secondary procedure. Indications and procedures at the time of the secondary operation were documented for each study. Average PROs were recorded, and standardized mean difference was calculated to estimate effect size. RESULTS: Eighteen studies reporting on patients undergoing a secondary procedure after a previous hip arthroscopy were included. The 3 main secondary procedure groups were revision hip arthroscopy, secondary PAO, and secondary THA. Regarding the revision arthroscopy group, the most common indications were labral tears, cam deformity, and pincer deformity. In addition, the most common procedures were femoroplasty, acetabuloplasty, capsular release, and labral reconstruction. The most common indications for the secondary PAO and THA groups were dysplasia and osteoarthritis respectively. Five of the revision arthroscopy studies found that revision patients had worse outcomes than the primary arthroscopy group. One PAO study found that the previous arthroscopy group had slightly worse outcomes, and 2 studies found no differences in PROs. Two THA studies reported worse outcomes for the prior arthroscopy group, and 2 studies reported no differences in outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The most common indications for revision hip arthroscopy were labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement. Patients undergoing a revision hip arthroscopy demonstrated good postoperative outcomes but to an overall lesser extent than their primary counterparts. The secondary PAO and THA groups also had favorable PROs, but the studies were inconclusive in determining superior outcomes between the primary and secondary groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, Systematic review of Level II-IV investigations.

Circumferential Labral Reconstruction for Irreparable Labral Tears in the Primary Setting: Minimum 2-Year Outcomes With a Nested Matched-Pair Labral Repair Control Group.

PURPOSE: (1) To report minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores of primary circumferential acetabular labral reconstruction using anterior tibialis allograft and the knotless pull-through technique in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and irreparable labral tears and (2) to compare these PROs with a matched-pair primary labral repair group. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they underwent primary circumferential labral reconstruction with anterior tibialis tendon allograft during February 2016 to April 2017 for irreparable labral tears and FAIS and had preoperative and minimum 2-year follow-up for modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale, Non-arthritic Hip Score, International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical component and mental component, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey physical component and mental component, and visual analog scale for pain. The exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip conditions or surgical procedures, Tönnis grade 2 or higher, or dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle ≤ 18°). Labral tears were considered irreparable if the labrum appeared (1) to be mostly or completely calcified and (2) to be inadequate (nonviable) and not amenable for labral repair. The reconstruction group was matched 1:3 based on age, sex, and body mass index to a benchmark control group of hips undergoing labral repair from the same period. The minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state for the mHHS and iHOT-12 score were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 37 hips (37 patients) underwent circumferential labral reconstruction. There were 19 female patients (51.4%) and 18 male patients (48.6%). The mean age was 45.6 ± 11.6 years, and the average body mass index was 27.1 ± 5. At minimum 2-year follow-up, the circumferential labral reconstruction group showed statistically significant improvements in the mHHS, Non-arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale, iHOT-12 score, and visual analog scale score. All hips in the reconstruction group were successfully matched to 111 labral repair hips. At latest follow-up, improvements in all PROs between the 2 groups were comparable. The revision rates were 0% and 3.6% in the reconstruction and repair groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After primary hip arthroscopy, primary circumferential labral reconstruction using anterior tibialis allograft and the knotless pull-through technique in the setting of FAIS and irreparable labral tears resulted in significant improvements in several PROs at minimum 2-year follow-up and high patient satisfaction. Primary circumferential labral reconstruction reached comparable functional outcomes to those of a benchmark matched-pair primary labral repair control group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control study.

Hip Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy: Are Short-term Outcomes Affected? A Systematic Review of the Literature.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the published literature regarding intraoperative measures, patient-reported outcomes, and complications of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with or without a history of prior hip arthroscopy. METHODS: PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for all publications regarding patients who had undergone a THA after a prior ipsilateral hip arthroscopy. Included studies were comparative in nature and included postoperative outcome measures. Excluded studies were opinion articles, review articles, cadaveric studies, case reports, or technique articles. Patient demographics, surgical outcomes, complications, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were recorded. This study was performed at the American Hip Institute. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in this systematic review. These included 305 hips with a THA following a prior hip arthroscopy, with 502 matched control hips. Mean time for conversion from prior hip arthroscopy was 23 months and mean follow up was 35.9 versus 36.1, for the prior arthroscopy and control groups respectively. No significant differences were found regarding intraoperative measures and PROMs. There was no difference in rate of revisions at latest follow up. However, there was a trend toward higher rates of dislocations and infections in the prior hip arthroscopy group. CONCLUSION: The short-term PROMs of those who underwent total hip arthroplasty with a prior history of an ipsilateral hip arthroscopy are comparable to those of patients undergoing primary THA. Although a conclusion could not be made regarding differences in complication rates between patients with a history of prior arthroscopy and patients undergoing primary THA, it is still imperative to consider the possible implications of a prior hip procedure on postoperative stability and infection rates. In summary, hip arthroplasty following a prior hip arthroscopy is a safe procedure with comparable short-term outcomes to primary arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review.

COVID-19 Resulted in Reduction Trainee Bedside Experience, But No Reduction in Surgical Experience.

Purpose: Because of the concerns regarding residency process during the pandemic, this study aimed to investigate the volume of clinical interactions of orthopaedic residents at a tertiary hospital by reporting the number of patients treated in the outpatient clinic, inpatient ward, and operating room. Methods: This retrospective chart study evaluated variables such as volume of clinical interactions of orthopaedic residents at a tertiary hospital by reporting the number of patients treated in the outpatient clinic, inpatient ward, and operating room, from an orthopaedic department in a tertiary trauma center throughout the COVID-19 pandemic era. Comparing these measures was an indirect evaluation tool for measuring the amount of work completed and clinical exposure gained by the residents. Results: Occupancy percentage, hospitalization days, admissions to the department, and attendance of the outpatient clinic were all decreased during the pandemic. No significant changes were evident in the total number of surgeries nor the number of elective surgeries during the pandemic. Conclusions: Overall, a reduction in overall hospitalization days, admissions to the department, total number of visits in the outpatient clinic, and occupancy percentage of the ward was observed during COVID-19. However, there was no difference in the average number of monthly surgeries between the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 timeframes. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative review.

Acute Case of Trichobezoar Diagnosed From Computed Tomography and 3D Images: Rapunzel Syndrome Re-examined.

A trichobezoar is a rare cause of abdominal pain due to an indigestible mass in the gastrointestinal tract that is composed of a patient's hair. If a trichobezoar grows and extends from the gastric body to the pylorus and into the small bowel, it is considered Rapunzel syndrome. We present a case of an 11-year-old female patient with Rapunzel syndrome who presented with four weeks of colicky abdominal pain, vomiting, constipation, and severe malnutrition. Computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis with 3D rendering demonstrated a large bezoar, and the patient was successfully treated with exploratory laparotomy, gastrostomy, and removal of the trichobezoar intact.

Risk Factors for a Failed Transmetatarsal Amputation in Patients with Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Transmetatarsal amputation (TMA) is a well-recognized limb-salvage procedure, often indicated for the treatment of diabetic foot infections. Currently, there is no widespread agreement in the literature with regard to the factors associated with failure of TMA. This study aimed to define risk factors for the failure of TMA, defined as below-the-knee or above-the-knee amputation, in patients with diabetes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 341 patients who underwent primary TMA. Patients who had a revision to a higher level (the failed TMA group) were compared with those who did not have failure of the initial amputation (the successful TMA group). RESULTS: This study showed a higher frequency of renal impairment, defined as a high creatinine level and/or a previous kidney transplant or need for dialysis, in the failed TMA group (p = 0.002 for both). Furthermore, a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) threshold value of 7.5 was identified as the optimal predictive value for failure of TMA (p = 0.002), and patients with a CCI of >7.5 had a median time of 1.13 months until the initial amputation failed. CONCLUSIONS: TMA is associated with a high risk of revision. CCI may be used as a preoperative selection criterion, as 71.8% of patients with a CCI of >7.5 had failure of the TMA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Survivorship, Outcomes, and Risk Factors for Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty After Revision Hip Arthroscopic Surgery in Obese Patients: Results at a Minimum 5-Year Follow-up.

Background: There is a paucity of literature reporting outcomes after revision hip arthroscopic surgery in obese patients. Purpose: To report the minimum 5-year survivorship, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), clinical benefit, and risk factors for conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) in obese patients after revision hip arthroscopic surgery. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopic surgery by a single surgeon between April 2010 and August 2016. Inclusion criteria were a body mass index ≥30 and baseline and minimum 5-year postoperative values for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Exclusion criteria were Tönnis grade >1 and hip dysplasia. Survivorship was defined as no conversion to THA. Clinical benefit was measured using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Survivors and nonsurvivors underwent further bivariate and regression analyses to determine the predictors of conversion to THA. Results: Included were 24 hips in 24 patients. The mean patient age was 39.3 ± 12.7 years, and the mean follow-up was 83.9 ± 26.5 months. The survivorship rate was 75.0%, and patients demonstrated a significant improvement in all PROs (P < .01). At 5-year follow-up, the MCID for the mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and VAS was achieved by 70.6%, 94.1%, 92.9%, and 64.7%, respectively, of the patients. Older age, higher grade ligamentum teres tears, and acetabuloplasty were significant on bivariate analysis for conversion to THA, and increased age was identified as a significant variable for conversion to THA on regression analysis (odds ratio, 1.297 [95% CI, 1.045-1.609]; P = .018), with a 29.7% greater risk for every additional year of age at the time of revision. Conclusion: In this study, 25.0% of obese patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopic surgery required conversion to THA. The study patients who did not need conversion to THA had a significant improvement in all PROs, with >90% achieving MCID for one or more outcome measures. Older age was identified as a significant predictor of conversion to THA.

Trends in Female Authorship in Orthopaedic Literature from 2002 to 2021: An Analysis of 168,451 Authors.

BACKGROUND: Significant gender disparity exists in orthopaedic surgery. While women have increasingly entered the field, we are short of the critical mass needed to drive change, including in authorship. This study aimed to characterize trends in authorship in peer-reviewed orthopaedic journals in the context of gender. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional bibliometric study of orthopaedic journals in the United States. Articles that were indexed in the orthopaedic category of the Clarivate Journal Citation Report (JCR) and the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) were analyzed (n = 82). Journals not originating from the U.S. (n = 43) or not considered primarily orthopaedic journals (n = 13) were excluded. The 2020 impact factors (IFs) of the remaining 26 journals were recorded. The articles underwent automated data collection from PubMed for January 2002 to December 2021 using R software to collect the title, the journal, the publication year, the first and senior author names, and the country of origin. Gender was determined by Gender API ( https://gender-api.com ). Names with <90% accuracy were excluded. RESULTS: Overall, 168,451 names were studied, with 85,845 and 82,606 first and senior authors, respectively. Of the first and senior authors, 13.6% and 9.9%, respectively, were female. The proportion of female first authors was significantly greater than the proportion of female senior authors. The average IF was significantly higher for male authors compared with female authors (p < 0.005). Articles with female first authors were significantly more likely to have a female senior author. Orthopaedic subspecialty journals had a smaller proportion of manuscripts authored by female first and senior authors than general journals (p < 0.0001). There were 4,451 articles written by a single author, of which 92% (4,093) were written by a man and 8% (358) were written by a woman. Over the 20-year study period, the proportion of female first authorship exhibited a significant positive trend; however, there was a non-significant increase in female senior authorship. CONCLUSIONS: Female representation in orthopaedics has been growing over the past decade. Increasing publication rates of female authors reveal steps toward positive gender equity in the field and present an opportunity for female leadership visibility, illustrating the capabilities of women in orthopaedics and encouraging more women to join the field.

Predictors of Achieving the Maximal Outcome Improvement Threshold for Willingness to Undergo Revision Hip Arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: The maximal outcome improvement threshold for willingness to undergo revision hip arthroscopy (MOWT) has not been defined yet. PURPOSE: To determine the percentage MOWT in patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy and to identify predictors of achieving the MOWT. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: An anchor question was provided to patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy between April 2008 and June 2020 who returned for follow-up between August 2019 and June 2021 at one institution. Patients were included if they underwent revision hip arthroscopy, had answered the anchor question, and had baseline and postoperative minimum 1-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Exclusion criteria were Tönnis grade >1, hip dysplasia, previous hip conditions, or unwillingness to participate. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine the MOWT. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine intraoperative predictors of achieving the MOWT. RESULTS: In total, 153 patients (163 hips) were included, with 117 female hips (71.8%), a mean patient age of 34.3 ± 12.4 years, and an average follow-up time of 61.6 ± 42.7 months. It was determined that 77.3% of the patients reported that they would choose to undergo the revision hip arthroscopy again. The MOWT for the mHHS, NAHS, and VAS was 43.1%, 53%, and 33.4%, respectively. The probability of choosing to undergo revision surgery if the MOWT was achieved was 77.5%, 77.6%, and 79.2%, for the mHHS, NAHS, and VAS, respectively. Patients with residual cam-type morphology, which was addressed during the revision, were 2.3 times more likely to achieve the MOWT for the VAS (P = .014). CONCLUSION: Patients who improved 43.1%, 53%, and 33.4% of their MOWT for the mHHS, NAHS, and VAS, respectively, were likely to be willing to undergo revision hip arthroscopy again. Moreover, the presence of residual cam-type femoroacetabular impingement morphology before their revision surgery was identified as a predictor to achieve the MOWT for the VAS.

Minimum 5-Year Outcomes After Primary Segmental Labral Reconstruction for Irreparable Labral Tears in the Hip With Hamstring Grafts: With a Subanalysis Comparing Autograft Versus Allograft.

BACKGROUND: Comparable short-term outcomes have been obtained using hamstring allografts versus autografts after primary segmental labral reconstruction (SLR). Midterm results have not yet been determined. PURPOSE: (1) To evaluate minimum 5-year patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores in patients who underwent primary SLR with hamstring grafts in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and irreparable labral tears and (2) to compare the outcomes of hamstring autografts versus allografts in a subanalysis using propensity-matched groups. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Prospectively collected data were retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between September 2010 and November 2015. Patients were included if they underwent SLR using hamstring autografts or allografts and had preoperative and minimum 5-year PROs. The exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip surgery or conditions, dysplasia, or Tönnis grade >1. Patients with autograft SLR were propensity matched 1 to 1 based on age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) to patients who underwent SLR using hamstring allografts. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 48 patients (N = hips 48) were eligible to be included in this study, and 41 patients (n = 41 hips [85.4%]) had a minimum 5-year follow-up reporting significant improvements in all PROs. Within the entire cohort, 9.8% required a secondary arthroscopy, with a mean time of 19 ± 1.8 months, and survivorship was 82.9%. Of the 41 included patients, 15 underwent an SLR with a hamstring autograft and were matched to 15 patients with labral reconstruction using a hamstring allograft. Groups were similar for sex (P > .999), age (P = .775), and BMI (P = .486). The mean follow-up times were 80.8 ± 25.5 and 66.1 ± 8.3 months (P = .223) for the autograft and allograft groups, respectively. Baseline PROs, preoperative radiographic measurements, surgical findings, and intraoperative procedures were similar. The groups achieved significant and comparable improvements for all PROs (P < .0001), satisfaction (P = .187), and the rate of achieving the MCID and the PASS. However, a tendency for higher postoperative PROs favoring allograft reconstruction was found. CONCLUSION: At a minimum 5-year follow-up, patients who underwent primary arthroscopic SLR in the context of FAIS and irreparable labra, with either autograft or allograft hamstring tendons, reported significant improvements and comparable postoperative scores for all PROs, patient satisfaction, MCID, and PASS.

Maximal Outcome Improvement Willingness Thresholds Are Predictive of a Patient's Willingness to Undergo the Same Surgery, in Retrospect, Given the Known Outcome of Their Primary Hip Arthroscopy.

Purpose: To determine the percent maximal outcome improvement willingness thresholds (MOWTs) for the Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS) and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain that were associated with a patient's willingness to undergo surgery, in retrospect, given the known outcome of their primary hip arthroscopy with concomitant endoscopy for gluteus medius (GM) tear repair. Methods: An anchor question was provided to patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome with concomitant endoscopic GM tear repair between April 2008 to April 2020. Patients were included if they answered the anchor question and had baseline and postoperative minimum 1-year follow-up scores for the NAHS and VAS. Patients were excluded if they had a previous ipsilateral hip surgery, Tönnis grade >1, hip dysplasia, previous hip conditions, or a preoperative score that was already at the maximum value for the NAHS and VAS scores. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the MOWT. Significance was indicated by a P value <.05. Results: A total of 107 patients (107 hips) were included, with 101 (94.4%) females and 6 (5.6%) males. The average age and body mass index was 56.20 ± 9.88 years and 28.80 ± 4.92 kg/m2, respectively. The average follow-up time was 54.89 ± 29.52 months. The ROC analysis determined that the MOWT for the mHHS and VAS were 54.7%, and 62.6%, respectively. The probability of a patient being willing to undergo surgery again if they met the MOWT was 85.8% and 85.6% for the NAHS and VAS, respectively. Conclusion: The MOWTs that were predictive of willingness to undergo surgery again following primary hip arthroscopy with concomitant endoscopy for GM tear repair were 54.7% and 62.6% for the NAHS, and VAS, respectively. Clinical Relevance: Outcome assessment has been a point of increasing emphasis in hip preservation surgery. Having a tool to measure whether patients would go through the process of surgery again knowing their current outcome status is important to understanding outcomes after surgery.