Open and Endoscopic Gluteus Medius/Minimus Repair Achieves Clinical Success Regardless of Tear Grade: High-Grade Fatty Infiltration Portends Worse Outcomes.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate minimum 2-year gluteus medius/minimus repair clinical success rates stratified by the Three-Grade Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Based Classification (MRI-Grade). Secondary aims were to evaluate clinical success rates by the surgical approach used at each MRI-Grade and by the Goutallier-Fuchs (GF) classification. METHODS: A retrospective review identified patients who underwent primary endoscopic or open gluteus medius/minimus repair from 2012 to 2021 by a single surgeon. Preoperative MRIs were classified using the MRI-Grade and GF classifications. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up. Cohort-specific minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) achievement was recorded. Clinical success rates, defined as achievement of 2-year MCID or PASS with avoidance of revision surgery, were compared by MRI-Grade, by surgical approach at each MRI-Grade, and by GF classification. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (MRI Grade 1=71, Grade 2=19, Grade 3=22) were included. MRI-Grade 1 patients underwent endoscopic repair (p<0.001) more often compared to the other groups. The overall clinical success rate was 90%. Clinical success rates by MRI-Grade were: Grade 1=93%, Grade 2=95%, Grade 3=77% (P=0.087). Clinical success rates by the endoscopic and open surgical approaches used at each MRI-Grade were: Grade 1: 93% vs. 90% (P=0.543), Grade 2: 91% vs. 100% (P=1.000), Grade 3: 60% vs. 92% (P=0.135). GF Grade 1 tears achieved a higher rate of clinical success compared to GF Grade 4 tears (100% vs. 71%, P=0.030). CONCLUSION: Primary repair of gluteus medius/minimus tears resulted in clinical success in most patients irrespective of MRI-Grade and irrespective of the surgical approach used at each MRI-Grade, yet GF Grade 1 tears showed a significantly higher clinical success rate compared to GF Grade 4 tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Retrospective Case Series.

Outcomes of Isolated Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair Compared With Concomitant Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair and Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair: A Propensity-Matched Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

Background: Both gluteal and labral tears are common sources of hip pain, but no studies have evaluated how concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) affect outcomes after endoscopic gluteus/minimus repair. Purpose: (1) To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinically significant outcomes achievements between patients who underwent endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus and arthroscopic hip labral repair with correction of FAIS versus endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair and (2) to define threshold scores required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool, and visual analog scale for pain in these patients. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent primary endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair between 2012 and 2020 were identified. Those who underwent concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of FAIS with femoroplasty or acetabuloplasty as indicated were propensity matched in a 1 to 1 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index to patients who underwent gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair. Patients who completed the study PROs were assessed preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Threshold scores required to achieve the MCID and PASS thresholds were calculated. Results: A total of 32 patients who underwent simultaneous gluteal and labral repair (G+L) were matched to 32 patients who underwent gluteal repair without labral repair (G); 75% of patients in the G cohort underwent labral debridement, while 25% in this cohort received no labral treatment. A significant difference was observed between groups in preoperative mHHS scores (G+L, 54.4 ± 12.9 vs G, 46.3 ± 14; P = .048) but no differences in any other PRO scores (P≥ .207). The MCID/PASS thresholds were as follows: Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (11.14/83.82), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (16.07/59.72), mHHS (11.47/70.95), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (13.73/45.49), and visual analog scale for pain (14.30/22). There were no significant differences in MCID or PASS achievement rates between the 2 groups (P≥ .108). Conclusion: Patients who underwent combined G+L demonstrated comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes achievement rates to patients who underwent G, highlighting sustained successful outcomes for patients with gluteal tendon pathology and concomitant FAIS and labral tears.

The Gluteus-Score-7 Predicts the Likelihood of Both Clinical Success and Failure Following Surgical Repair of the Hip Gluteus Medius and/or Minimus.

PURPOSE: To identify patient preoperative history, examination, and imaging characteristics that increase the risk of postoperative failure of gluteus medius/minimus repair, and to develop a decision-making aid predictive of clinical outcomes for patients undergoing gluteus medius/minimus repair. METHODS: Patients from 2012 to 2020 at a single institution undergoing gluteus medius/minimus repair with minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. MRIs were graded according to the "three-grade" classification system: grade 1: partial-thickness tear, grade 2: full-thickness tears with <2 cm of retraction, grade 3: full-thickness tears with ≥2 cm retraction. Failure was defined as undergoing revision within 2 years postoperatively or not achieving both a cohort-calculated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and responding "no" to patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). Inversely, success was defined as reaching both an MCID and responding "yes" to PASS. Predictors of failure were verified on logistic regression and a predictive scoring model, the Gluteus-Score-7, was generated to guide treatment-decision making. RESULTS: In total, 30 of 142 patients (21.1%) were clinical failures at mean ± SD follow-up of 27.0 ± 5.2 months. Preoperative smoking (odds ratio [OR], 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-8.4; P = .041), lower back pain (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.3; P = .038), presence of a limp or Trendelenburg gait (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.5-10.2; P = .006), history of psychiatric diagnosis (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.3-10.8; P = .014), and increased MRI classification grades (P ≤ .042) were independent predictors of failure. The Gluteus-Score-7 was generated with each history/examination predictor assigned 1 point and MRI classes assigned corresponding 1-3 points (min 1, max 7 score). A score of ≥4/7 points was associated with risk of failure and a score ≤2/7 points was associated with clinical success. CONCLUSIONS: Independent risk factors for revision or not achieving either MCID or PASS after gluteus medius and/or minimus tendon repair include smoking, preoperative lower back pain, psychiatric history, Trendelenburg gait, and full-thickness tears, especially tears with ≥2 cm retraction. The Gluteus-Score-7 tool incorporating these factors can identify patients at risk of both surgical treatment failure and success, which may be useful for clinical decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic case series.

Three-Grade Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Gluteus Medius and/or Minimus Tear Classification System Provides Excellent Inter-Rater Reliability.

Purpose: To develop a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based classification system integrating tear characteristics including tear thickness (partial vs full) and tear retraction (less than or greater than 2 cm) for gluteus medius and/or minimus tears and to determine the inter-rater reliability of this MRI-based classification for gluteus medius and/or minimus tears. Methods: Patients who underwent primary endoscopic or open repair of gluteus medius and/or minimus tears between 2012 and 2022 were identified to be included in the review of 1.5-T MRI scans. One hundred MRI scans were randomized for review by 2 orthopaedic surgeons and evaluated for tear thickness (partial vs full), extent of retraction, and degree of fatty infiltration according to an applied Goutallier-Fuchs (G-F) classification. Tears were also graded according to the 3-grade MRI-based classification system as follows: grade 1, partial-thickness tears; grade 2, full-thickness tears with less than 2 cm of retraction; grade 3, full thickness with 2 cm or more retraction. Inter-rater reliability was calculated by absolute and relative agreement using Cohen's kappa (κ). Significance was defined by P value <.05. Results: In total, 221 patients were identified, and after application of exclusion criteria and randomization, 100 scans were evaluated. The 3-grade classification system demonstrated high absolute agreement (88%) comparable to the absolute agreement of the G-F classification (67%). The 3-grade classification system demonstrated substantial inter-rater reliability (κ = 0.753), whereas the G-F classification demonstrated moderate inter-rater reliability (κ = 0.489). Conclusions: The proposed 3-grade MRI-based classification system for gluteus medius and/or minimus tears demonstrated substantial inter-rater reliability, comparable with that of the applied G-F classification. Clinical Relevance: It is important to understand how gluteus medius and/or minimus tear characteristics impact postoperative outcomes. The 3-grade MRI-based classification incorporates tear thickness and amount of retraction that can complement previous classification systems to give the provider and patient more information when considering treatment options.

Patient-specific instrumentation for medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomies in the management of medial compartment osteoarthritis yields high accuracy and low complication rates: A systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: There has been growing interest in the use of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) to maximise accuracy and minimise the risk of major complications for medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomies (MOW-HTOs). Numerous studies have reported the efficacy and safety of implementing this technology into clinical practice, yet no systematic review summarising the clinical literature on PSI for MOW-HTOs has been performed to date. AIM: The aim of this investigation was to perform a systematic review summarising the evidence surrounding the use of PSI for MOW-HTOs in the management of medial compartment osteoarthritis. EVIDENCE REVIEW: PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were queried in October 2021 for studies that used PSI for MOW-HTOs when managing medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. Primary outcomes included accuracy in coronal plane correction (mechanical medial proximal tibial angle), sagittal plane correction (posterior tibial slope), and mechanical axis correction (hip-knee-ankle angle [HKA], mechanical femorotibial angle, and weight-bearing line). Accuracy was defined as error between post-operative measurements relative to the planned pre-operative correction. A secondary outcome was the incidence of major complications. FINDINGS: This review included eight different techniques among the 14 included studies. There was a weighted mean error of 0.5° (range: 0.1°-1.3°) for the mechanical medial proximal tibial angle, 0.6° (range: 0.3°-2.7°) for the posterior tibial slope, and 0.8° (range: 0.1°-1.0°) for the hip-knee-ankle angle. Four studies compared the correctional error of the mechanical axis between conventional techniques and PSI techniques. The comparative difference between the two techniques favoured the use of PSI for MOW-HTOs (standardised mean difference â€‹= â€‹0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.87; p â€‹= â€‹0.004). Among the 14 studies evaluated, four studies explicitly reported no major complications, while five studies reported a non-zero incidence of major complications. Among these nine studies, the weighted mean major complication rate was 7.1% (range: 0.0-13.0%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this present systematic review suggest that the use of PSI for MOW-HTOs leads to high accuracy relative to the planned corrections in the coronal plane, sagittal plane, and mechanical axis. Furthermore, these findings would suggest there is a low risk of major complications when implementing PSI for MOW-HTOs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review; IV.

Proximal Tibiofibular Joint Reconstruction With a Semitendinosus Allograft for Chronic Instability.

Whereas acute proximal tibiofibular joint (PTFJ) dislocation may require urgent reduction, chronic or recurrent instability may initially be approached with conservative treatment. Indications for PTFJ reconstruction include persistent lateral knee pain and/or tibiofibular instability for which conservative treatment has failed. Owing to the low incidence of diagnosed isolated PTFJ instability, there is still no consensus regarding the optimal surgical treatment, with an array of options having been previously described. We describe the treatment of isolated PTFJ instability using an anatomic reconstruction with semitendinosus allograft for chronic instability.

Defining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State After Endoscopic Gluteus Medius or Minimus Repair With or Without Labral Treatment and Routine Capsular Closure at Minimum 5-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of information in the literature on midterm outcomes of endoscopic gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant labral treatment using only modern surgical techniques. PURPOSE: To define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively for patients undergoing endoscopic hip abductor repair with routine capsular closure. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent primary endoscopic repair of gluteus medius and/or minimus tears between January 2012 and December 2015 by the senior author were eligible for inclusion. Patient-reported outcome scores were assessed preoperatively and at 5 years postoperatively: Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), HOS-Sport Specific (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. The MCID was uniquely calculated using the distribution method, and the PASS was determined via the anchor-based method utilizing receiver operating characteristic curves and Youden index. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients were included in the study. The majority were female (87.0%), with a mean ± standard deviation age of 59.1 ± 8.9 years and body mass index of 27.3 ± 6.9. Significant postoperative improvements (P < .001) in each of the 5 patient-reported outcomes were observed at 5 years postoperatively. The MCID threshold values were calculated as follows: HOS-ADL, 11.5; HOS-SS, 15.1; mHHS, 13.3; iHOT-12, 11.8; and VAS, 15.8. The PASS thresholds were calculated as follows: HOS-ADL, 75.7; HOS-SS, 79.7; mHHS, 81.2; and iHOT-12, 60.8. A majority of patients achieved a clinically significant outcome, with 96.2% of patients reaching a threshold score for the MCID or PASS for at least 1 patient-reported outcome. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic hip abductor repair with concomitant arthroscopic labral treatment has a high rate of achievement of clinically significant outcomes and survivorship at a minimum 5-year follow-up. We defined the MCID for the HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, mHHS, iHOT-12, and VAS outcome scores to be 11.5, 15.1, 13.3, 11.8, and 15.8, respectively. The PASS threshold scores for the HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, mHHS and iHOT-12 scores of 75.7, 79.7, 81.2, and 60.8, respectively. Future researchers and clinicians can use the MCID and PASS values established in this study to better evaluate mid-term outcomes of patients undergoing hip abductor repair.

The fifty most cited publications in shoulder arthroplasty research.

Introduction: Frequency of citation provides one quantitative metric of the impact that an article has on a given field. The purpose of this study was to evaluate characteristics of the 50 most cited publications on shoulder arthroplasty. Methods: The Web of Science database was used to determine the 50 most frequently cited shoulder arthroplasty articles. Articles were evaluated for several factors including type of arthroplasty, citation frequency and rate, source journal, country of origin, study type, and level of evidence. Results: The most common countries of origin were the United States (60%) followed by France (24%) and Switzerland (6%). A total of 27 (54%) articles included anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), 18 (36%) included reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), and 15 (30%) included hemiarthroplasty. Articles including RTSA had the greatest number of citations compared to those on TSA (p = 0.037) and hemiarthroplasty (p = 0.035). Citations per year were also greatest with RTSA compared to TSA and hemiarthroplasty (p ≤ 0.001). Discussion: This citation analysis includes many of the landmark studies that shaped, and continue to impact, the field of shoulder arthroplasty. This list provides a group of influential articles that provide a foundation for future research in shoulder arthroplasty.

Surgical Treatment of Gluteus Medius Tears.

The gluteus medius originates on the posterior face of the ilium between the posterior and anterior gluteal lines and inserts into the lateral and superoposterior facets of the greater trochanter. Because of the asymmetric nature of the muscle, tears are more likely to occur on the thinner anterolateral portion of the tendon footprint. Gluteus medius tears range from interstitial, partial thickness tears to retracted, full-thickness tears and may result from trauma, but they are more commonly the result of chronic degeneration. Patients commonly present with lateral hip pain aggravated by weight bearing and sleeping on the affected side, weakness in abduction, and the Trendelenburg sign observable on physical examination. Indications for surgery include failed conservative treatment and an ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging study demonstrating a torn tendon. Surgical intervention aims to reapproximate and secure the torn tendon to the tendon footprint on the greater trochanter via suture anchors. Both open and endoscopic techniques have shown to be effective methods for treating gluteus medius tears at short- and long-term follow-up; however, endoscopic techniques have been shown to result in fewer postoperative complications, such as retear. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis found patients with more severe fatty infiltration (FI) may experience greater improvement after open repair, whereas patients with less severe FI may benefit more from endoscopic treatment. A double-row repair maximizes contact area between tendon and bone and has shown to be superior to single-row repair with an endoscopic technique.

Medial Patellofemoral Complex Reconstruction Techniques Are Not Equivalent at Lower Flexion in the Setting of Patella Alta: A Biomechanical Comparison.

PURPOSE: To (1) determine the effect of severe patella alta on lateral patellar displacement after medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction and medial quadriceps tendon-femoral ligament (MQTFL) reconstruction and (2) determine whether lateral displacement significantly differs between MPFL and MQTFL reconstructions in the setting of severe patella alta (Caton-Deschamps Index [CDI] of 1.6). METHODS: Eight cadaveric specimens were included. High-tensile strength suture was used to create a model of adjustable patellar height. Patellar height was set using fluoroscopy to CDI ratios of 1.0 (normal) and 1.6 (alta). Specimens underwent testing (1) with MPFL reconstruction, (2) with MQTFL reconstruction, and (3) in a medial patellofemoral complex (MPFC)-deficient control state, in randomized order, at both CDI settings: 1.0 and 1.6. Lateral patellar translation was measured at 0°, 10°, 20°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion with 10 N of laterally directed load. RESULTS: At a CDI of 1.6, MPFL reconstruction showed significantly lower lateral displacement than MQTFL reconstruction at 0° and 20°. When compared with MPFC-deficient controls at a CDI of 1.6, MPFL reconstruction showed significantly lower displacement at 0° and 20° whereas MQTFL reconstruction was not significantly different at any degree of flexion. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of severe patella alta (CDI of 1.6), MPFL reconstruction results in less lateral patellar displacement than MQTFL reconstruction at 0° and 20° of knee flexion. At higher flexion angles (≥30°), there is no difference between the 2 reconstruction techniques and the CDI no longer has an effect. At a CDI of 1.0, MPFL reconstruction shows lower displacement than MQTFL reconstruction in full extension only. Surgeons performing MPFC reconstruction should evaluate patients for patella alta and consider patellar height when deciding on the reconstruction technique. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study suggests that MQTFL reconstruction may be less stable than MPFL reconstruction in the setting of patella alta, without other known pathoanatomic factors, at early knee flexion angles. Patellar height should be considered when choosing the appropriate reconstruction technique in the absence of a distalization procedure.

Influence of Fatty Infiltration on Hip Abductor Repair Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence supports surgical intervention for hip abductor tears; however, the influence of fatty infiltration (FI) on outcomes after repair remains uncertain and has been addressed only in small case series. PURPOSE: To clarify the relationship between FI and surgical outcomes for hip abductor tears. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. FI severity was assessed by Goutallier-Fuchs (G-F) grade. The relationship between FI and improvement in Harris Hip Score (HHS)/modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain was examined with mixed-effects metaregression. Outcomes with open and endoscopic techniques were also compared. RESULTS: A total of 4 studies (206 repairs in 201 patients) were eligible. High-grade FI was associated with significantly less improvement in HHS/mHHS than both no FI (6.761 less; 95% CI, 3.983-11.570; P = .002) and low-grade FI (7.776 less; 95% CI, 2.460-11.062; P < .001) but did not significantly influence VAS score (P > .05). Controlling for FI severity, we found no significant difference in HHS/mHHS improvement between open versus endoscopic repair (P > .05 at each level), but open repair resulted in significantly greater improvement in VAS score for every G-F grade (all P < .005). CONCLUSION: Surgical intervention for symptomatic hip abductor tendon tears improved outcomes as reflected by change in HHS/mHHS; however, the presence of high-grade FI resulted in less improvement. FI severity did not influence VAS scores for pain. Although no differences were found between open and endoscopic repairs in terms of FI-adjusted improvement in HHS/mHHS, open repairs resulted in significantly greater pain relief at each FI level.

Patients Require Less Time to Complete Preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Than Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

PURPOSE: To analyze time to completion of preoperative legacy patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and more recent computer adaptive Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaires in patients with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement syndrome undergoing primary hip arthroscopy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing hip arthroscopy by a single fellowship-trained hip arthroscopist. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing primary arthroscopic hip surgery and completion of at least 1 legacy PRO or PROMIS questionnaire at the preoperative time point. Exclusion criteria were history of contralateral or ipsilateral hip surgery, non-English-speaking patients, patients who completed PROs by phone or by paper form, and patients who did not complete preoperative PROs. Legacy PROs included modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score (HOS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and Hip Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS-Pain). PROMIS PROs included Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), and Depression (PROMIS-D). Only preoperative PROs were included in the analysis. Completion time was calculated using the questionnaire start and stop time reported by the survey collecting software. The median and interquartile range of each PRO were reported for analysis of central tendency and statistical dispersion, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 1,901 patients and 269 patients were included in the legacy and PROMIS groups, respectively. The median time required for completion of each PRO in (minutes: seconds) format was as follows: mHHS (1:29), HOS (3:58), iHOT (2:11), VAS-Pain (0:32), PROMIS-PF (0:46), PROMIS-PI (0:37), and PROMIS-D (0:43). The interquartile range of the middle 50% of respondents was as follows; mHHS (0:58), HOS (2:46), iHOT (1:22), VAS-Pain (0:28), PROMIS-PI (0:19), PROMIS-D (0:29), and PROMIS-PF (0:20). CONCLUSIONS: This study supports that preoperative PROMIS forms require less time to complete than preoperative legacy PROs and are not significantly influenced by age, race, or workers compensation status. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Superior Gluteal Reconstruction Results in Promising Outcomes for Massive Abductor Tendon Tears.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the 1-year outcomes of a small patient series following open gluteus medius/minimus repair with human dermal allograft incorporated into the repair construct using a double-row repair. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients undergoing a superior gluteal reconstruction for massive, irreparable abductor tendon tears with severe tendon loss and atrophy by a single fellowship trained surgeon from January 2018 to May 2019 were collected and analyzed. Baseline demographic data and magnetic resonance imaging were collected preoperatively. Clinical outcomes including Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), HOS-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris hip score (mHHS), international Hip Outcome Score-12 (iHOT-12), visual analog scale (VAS) pain, and VAS satisfaction were recorded at 1-year postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 8 patients underwent open superior gluteal reconstruction for severe hip abductor deficiency. The mean age and body mass index were 62.6 ± 7.3 years and 29.6 ± 5.3 kg/m2, respectively. The majority of patients were female (N = 7, 87.5%). Three (37.5%) patients had undergone previous endoscopic gluteus medius repair and presented for revision surgery. All patients had full-thickness tears with gluteus medius and gluteus minimus involvement. Patients were evaluated at an average of 11.5 ± 1.7 months from the initial surgical intervention and reported a mean HOS-ADL of 82.9 ± 24.3, HOS-SS of 73.2 ± 37.3, mHHS of 83.6 ± 17.1, iHOT-12 of 63.9 ± 27.4, VAS Pain of 30.0 ± 23.1, and VAS Satisfaction of 87.1 ± 17.0. There was no evidence of retears in this patient cohort as defined by physical examination findings and/or corroborating magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Superior gluteal reconstruction for massive, irreparable abductor tendon tears with severe tendon loss and atrophy is a technique that demonstrates promising 1-year postoperative outcomes in both primary and revision patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Pain Catastrophizing and Kinesiophobia Affect Return to Sport in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement.

PURPOSE: To assess whether pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia affect return to sport (RTS) or clinically significant outcome (CSO) achievement in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). METHODS: Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy at a single institution between January 2017 and March 2017 were prospectively enrolled. Patients received the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia-11 (TSK-11) and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) questionnaires preoperatively, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. Patients also received the Hip Outcome Score Sport-Specific (HOS-SS) questionnaire preoperatively and 1 year and 2 years' postoperatively. An RTS questionnaire was completed at final follow-up. Bivariate correlations were conducted between PCS and TSK-11 scores and RTS status and achievement of CSOs of HOS-SS, based on patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB). RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients with an average age of 31.9 ± 12.2 and body mass index of 24.0 ± 3.8 participated in sport prior to surgery and were included in the study. Forty-two (72.4%) patients returned to sport at 10.5 ± 7.1 months following surgery. There was a significant reduction in TSK-11 and PCS scores at 1-year follow-up (TSK-11, 26.1 ± 6.0 vs 18.6 ± 6.1, P < .001; PCS, 17.7 ± 10.5 vs 4.3 ± 6.8, P < .001) as well as a significant improvement in HOS-SS (P < .001). At 1 year, fair correlations were demonstrated between PCS (r = -0.446, P = .010) and TSK (r = -0.330, P = .029) scores and RTS. Patient who returned to sport had lower PCS (8.5 ± 11.7 vs 3.0 ± 3.7, P = .010) and TSK-11 (21.8 ± 8.5 vs 17.6 ± 4.8, P = .029) scores at 1 year. At 1-year follow-up, PCS (r = -0.572, P = .001) and TSK-11 (r = -0.441, P = .012) scores demonstrated fair correlations with achieving PASS for HOS-SS at 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patient kinesiophobia and pain catastrophizing at 1-year follow-up were negatively correlated with RTS and achievement of a CSO in sport-related activities at 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, prospective cohort study.

Hip Capsular Plication With Crossed Mattress Stitch Configuration for a Revision Hip Arthroscopy in the Setting of Capsular Insufficiency.

The hip capsule is an important static stabilizer of the hip joint. Perioperative capsular management during hip-preservation surgery is critical to maintain hip stability. Many biomechanical and clinical studies have demonstrated the importance of performing a comprehensive capsular closure to restore normal hip kinematics. For this reason, capsular closure or plication is now routine practice for many hip arthroscopists. The purpose of the technique is to describe a capsular plication technique using a mattress stitch configuration performed in the revision setting.

Arthroscopic Anchor-Based Hip Capsular Reconstruction Without Graft Augmentation.

The hip capsule is one of the most important static stabilizers of the hip joint. Routine capsulotomy without closure during hip arthroscopy increases instability of the hip joint, leading to pain and dysfunction. Capsular repair is now part of routine practice for most hip arthroscopists with restoration of normal hip biomechanics. In patients requiring revision surgery due to ongoing pain and instability as a result of deficient capsule, capsular reconstruction often is necessary to restore hip stability. Although there are many techniques available both with and without the use of allograft tissue, the purpose of this report is to describe a novel technique for capsular reconstruction without the use of graft augmentation using suture anchors at the acetabular rim.

Repeat Revision Hip Arthroscopy Outcomes Match That of Initial Revision But Not That of Primary Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

PURPOSE: To (1) report on pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores for patients undergoing repeat revision surgery in short-term follow-up and (2) compare minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state achievement between primary, revision, and repeat revision hip arthroscopy cohorts. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy from January 2012 to February 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Hips that underwent 2 revision hip arthroscopic surgeries were identified and matched 1:3 to patients undergoing revision surgery and 1:3 to patients undergoing primary surgery by age, sex, and body mass index. Baseline demographic data, surgical indications, and hip-specific PROs were collected were obtained preoperatively and at minimum 1-year follow-up. MCID was calculated individually for each cohort. RESULTS: Twenty patients who underwent repeat revision were matched to 60 patients who underwent revision and 60 primary patients. Patients who underwent repeat revision achieved MCID on all investigated PROs at a similar rate to patients undergoing primary surgery (90.0% vs 91.7%, P = .588) and at a greater rate than patients undergoing first-time revision surgery (90.0% vs 71.7%, P = .045). Patients who underwent repeat revision achieved patient acceptable symptomatic state on all investigated PROs at a similar rate to patients who underwent first-time revision (30.0% vs 55.0%, P = .053) but at a significantly lower rate than primary patients (30.0% vs 76.7%, P < .001). However, patients undergoing repeat revision surgery had significantly lower preoperative PROs (P < .001 for all) and no significant difference in PROs at minimum 1-year follow-up compared with patients undergoing revision (P > .05). Compared with the primary cohort, patients who underwent repeat revision had significantly lower Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (77.3 ± 16.7 vs 86.1 ± 14.4; P = .034), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (60.6 ± 27.2 vs 76.1 ± 23.8; P < .001), and modified Harris Hip Score (69.2 ± 19.3 vs 81.7 ± 16.1; P = .048) at a minimum of 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Second-time revision hip arthroscopy, which often requires advanced procedures, results in clinically significant improvement in PROs; however, outcomes for repeat revision cases are similar to first-time revision cases but inferior to those obtained following primary surgeries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective case-control study.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Test Is Less Responsive Than Legacy Hip-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) computerized adaptive test and PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) instruments versus legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome at 1-year follow-up. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome without concomitant procedures performed by a single surgeon between August 2018 and January 2019 were identified. The PROMIS PF score, PROMIS PI score, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living Subscale (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score were obtained preoperatively and at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. Bivariate correlation analyses between PROMIS and legacy PROMs were performed. The floor and ceiling effects, responsiveness, and relative efficiency (RE) of each PROM were calculated. RESULTS: This study included 124 patients with an average age of 32.7 ± 12.3 years. The PROMIS PF score showed very good correlations with the HOS-ADL (r = 0.73, P < .001) and mHHS (r = 0.70, P < .001) and good correlations with the HOS-SS (r = 0.62, P < .001), iHOT-12 score (r = 0.62, P < .001), and VAS pain score (r = -0.64, P < .001). The PROMIS PI score showed very good inverse correlations with the HOS-ADL (r = -0.72, P < .001) and mHHS (r = -0.79, P < .001) and good correlations with the HOS-SS (r = -0.64, P < .001), iHOT-12 score (r = -0.65, P < .001), and VAS pain score (r = 0.65, P < .001). No floor effect was observed for any measure. Ceiling effects were not observed in the PROMIS PROMs but were detected for the HOS-ADL (16.1%) and mHHS (19.3%). The effect size was large for all outcomes: iHOT-12 score, d = 1.77; HOS-ADL, d = 1.37; HOS-SS, d = 1.45; PROMIS PI score, d = 1.05; and PROMIS PF score, d = 1.01. The iHOT-12 score was more responsive than the PROMIS PI score (RE = 1.69), PROMIS PF score (RE = 1.75), HOS-ADL (RE = 1.29), and HOS-SS (RE = 1.22). CONCLUSIONS: At 1-year follow-up, PROMIS PROMs displayed very good correlations with legacy PROMs. However, PROMIS PROMs had lower effect sizes and were not as responsive as legacy PROMs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, development of diagnostic criteria on the basis of consecutive patients.

Kidney transplant recipients' attitudes about using mobile health technology for managing and monitoring medication therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To assess smartphone ownership, use of mobile health (mHealth) applications, and willingness to use this technology to facilitate medication management after kidney transplantation. METHODS: A survey was developed with the use of previously validated questions and administered to stable adult kidney recipients from May to July 2015. Descriptive and comparative statistics were used to assess willingness to utilize mHealth technology as it related to sociodemographics, medication adherence, and medication side effects. Comparisons were also made to a survey administered in 2012. The primary outcome was the incidence of cell phone and smartphone ownership, willingness to use mHealth, immunosuppressant side effects, and self-reported nonadherence. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were approached, and 139 (98%) agreed to participate; 96% of respondents indicated mobile phone ownership, 61% owned a smartphone, 30% had prior knowledge of mHealth, and 7% were already using an mHealth app; 78% reported a positive attitude toward the use of mHealth for medication management. Smartphone ownership has nearly doubled since 2012 (61% vs. 35%; P <0.001). Patients <55 years of age were more likely to own smartphones (75% vs. 46%; P <0.001) and to strongly agree with the use of mHealth (62% vs. 36%; P = 0.015). Self-reported nonadherence or severe medication side effects did not appreciably influence a patient's willingness to use mHealth. CONCLUSION: Among recipients of kidney transplants, smartphone ownership has dramatically increased, and recipients have a positive attitude toward the use of mHealth for medication management.