The Fundamentals and Applications of Wearable Sensor Devices in Sports Medicine: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: To (1) characterize the various forms of wearable sensor devices (WSDs) and (2) review the peer-reviewed literature of applied wearable technology within sports medicine. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE databases, from inception through 2023, was conducted to identify eligible studies using WSDs within sports medicine. Data extraction was performed of study demographics and sensor specifications. Included studies were categorized by application: athletic training, rehabilitation, and research. RESULTS: In total, 43 studies met criteria for inclusion in this review. Forms of WSDs include pedometers, accelerometers, encoders (consisting of magnetometers and gyroscopes), force sensors, global positioning system trackers, and inertial measurement units. Outcome metrics include step counts; gait, limb motion, and angular positioning; foot and skin pressure; change of direction and inclination, including analysis of both body parts and athletes on a field; displacement and velocity of body segments and joints; heart rate; plethysmography; sport-specific kinematics; range of motion, symmetry, and alignment; head impact; sleep; throwing biomechanics; and kinetic and spatiotemporal running metrics. WSDs are used in athletic training to assess sport-specific biomechanics and workload with a goal of injury prevention and training optimization, as well as for rehabilitation monitoring and research such as for risk predicting and aiding diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: WSDs enable real-time monitoring of human performance across a variety of implementations and settings, allowing collection of metrics otherwise not achievable. WSDs are powerful tools with multiple applications within athletic training, patient rehabilitation, and orthopaedic and sports medicine research. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Wearable technology may represent the missing link to quantitatively addressing return to play and previous performance. WSDs are commercially available and portable adjuncts that allow clinicians, trainers, and individual athletes to monitor biomechanical parameters, workload, and recovery status to better contextualize personalized training, injury risk, and rehabilitation.

Who Are the Anatomic Outliers Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Computed Tomography-Based Analysis of the Hip-Knee-Ankle Axis Across 1,352 Preoperative Computed Tomographies Using a Deep Learning and Computer Vision-Based Pipeline.

BACKGROUND: Dissatisfaction after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) ranges from 15 to 30%. While patient selection may be partially responsible, morphological and reconstructive challenges may be determinants. Preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans for TKA planning allow us to evaluate the hip-knee-ankle axis and establish a baseline phenotypic distribution across anatomic parameters. The purpose of this cross-sectional analysis was to establish the distributions of 27 parameters in a pre-TKA cohort and perform threshold analysis to identify anatomic outliers. METHODS: There were 1,352 pre-TKA CTs that were processed. A 2-step deep learning pipeline of classification and segmentation models identified landmark images and then generated contour representations. We used an open-source computer vision library to compute measurements for 27 anatomic metrics along the hip-knee axis. Normative distribution plots were established, and thresholds for the 15th percentile at both extremes were calculated. Metrics falling outside the central 70th percentile were considered outlier indices. A threshold analysis of outlier indices against the proportion of the cohort was performed. RESULTS: Significant variation exists in pre-TKA anatomy across 27 normally distributed metrics. Threshold analysis revealed a sigmoid function with a critical point at 9 outlier indices, representing 31.2% of subjects as anatomic outliers. Metrics with the greatest variation related to deformity (tibiofemoral angle, medial proximal tibial angle, lateral distal femoral angle), bony size (tibial width, anteroposterior femoral size, femoral head size, medial femoral condyle size), intraoperative landmarks (posterior tibial slope, transepicondylar and posterior condylar axes), and neglected rotational considerations (acetabular and femoral version, femoral torsion). CONCLUSIONS: In the largest non-industry database of pre-TKA CTs using a fully automated 3-stage deep learning and computer vision-based pipeline, marked anatomic variation exists. In the pursuit of understanding the dissatisfaction rate after TKA, acknowledging that 31% of patients represent anatomic outliers may help us better achieve anatomically personalized TKA, with or without adjunctive technology.

Bayesian Calibration of Computational Knee Models to Estimate Subject-Specific Ligament Properties, Tibiofemoral Kinematics, and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Force With Uncertainty Quantification.

High-grade knee laxity is associated with early anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failure, poor function, and compromised clinical outcome. Yet, the specific ligaments and ligament properties driving knee laxity remain poorly understood. We described a Bayesian calibration methodology for predicting unknown ligament properties in a computational knee model. Then, we applied the method to estimate unknown ligament properties with uncertainty bounds using tibiofemoral kinematics and ACL force measurements from two cadaver knees that spanned a range of laxities; these knees were tested using a robotic manipulator. The unknown ligament properties were from the Bayesian set of plausible ligament properties, as specified by their posterior distribution. Finally, we developed a calibrated predictor of tibiofemoral kinematics and ACL force with their own uncertainty bounds. The calibrated predictor was developed by first collecting the posterior draws of the kinematics and ACL force that are induced by the posterior draws of the ligament properties and model parameters. Bayesian calibration identified unique ligament slack lengths for the two knee models and produced ACL force and kinematic predictions that were closer to the corresponding in vitro measurement than those from a standard optimization technique. This Bayesian framework quantifies uncertainty in both ligament properties and model outputs; an important step towards developing subject-specific computational models to improve treatment for ACL injury.

Hip Arthroscopy With Bone Marrow Aspirate Injection for Patients With Symptomatic Labral Tears and Early Degenerative Changes Shows Similar Improvement Compared With Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy With Symptomatic Labral Tears Without Arthritis.

PURPOSE: To define the clinical effect of intra-articular injection of iliac crest-derived bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) at the time of hip arthroscopy in patients with symptomatic labral tears and early radiographic degenerative changes. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected hip registry database was performed. Patients with symptomatic labral tears and Tönnis grade 1 or 2 degenerative changes who underwent labrum-preserving hip arthroscopy with BMAC injection were included and were matched with patients who underwent hip arthroscopy without BMAC injection. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected preoperatively and up to 2 years postoperatively included the modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sport, and International Hip Outcome Tool 33 score. Clinical relevance was measured with the minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptom state, and substantial clinical benefit for each outcome score. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients underwent labrum-preserving hip arthroscopy with BMAC injection and were matched with 35 control patients. There were no differences in demographic characteristics between the groups (P > .05). The BMAC group consisted of 22 patients (62.9%) with Tönnis grade 1 changes and 13 (37.1%) with Tönnis grade 2 changes, whereas all 35 control patients had Tönnis grade 0 hips. All PROs were significantly improved in both groups at 2 years, with no difference in improvement. The rate of failure requiring conversion to total hip arthroplasty was 14.3% (mean, 1.6 years postoperatively) in the BMAC group and 5.7% (mean, 7 years postoperatively) in the control group (P = .09). The difference in the frequency of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptom state, and substantial clinical benefit was not statistically significant between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In a challenging group of patients with symptomatic labral tears and early radiographic degenerative changes, hip arthroscopy with BMAC injection results in statistically and clinically significant improvement in PROs comparable to a group of patients with nonarthritic hips undergoing hip arthroscopy at short-term follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Majority of competitive soccer players return to soccer following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: female and older aged players are less likely to return to soccer.

PURPOSE: To determine return to soccer rates and soccer performance in a large cohort of competitive soccer players after hip arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and to identify possible risk factors associated with not returning to soccer. METHODS: An institutional hip preservation registry was retrospectively reviewed for patients identified as competitive soccer players who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAI performed between 2010 and 2017. Patient demographics and injury characteristics as well as clinical and radiographic findings were recorded. All patients were contacted for return to soccer information using a soccer-specific return to play questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify potential risk factors for not returning to soccer. RESULTS: Eighty-seven competitive soccer players (119 hips) were included. 32 players (37%) underwent simultaneous or staged bilateral hip arthroscopy. The mean age at surgery was 21.6 ± 7.0 years. Overall, 65 players (74.7%) returned to soccer, of which 43 players (49% of all included players) returned to pre-injury level of play or better. Most common reasons for not returning to soccer were pain or discomfort (50%) followed by fear of re-injury (31.8%). The mean time to return to soccer was 33.1 ± 26.3 weeks. Among 22 players who did not return to soccer, 14 (63.6%) reported satisfaction from surgery. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed female players (odds ratio [OR] = 0.27; confidence interval [CI] = 0.083 to 0.872; p = 0.029) and older aged players (OR = 0.895; 95% CI = 0.832 to 0.963; p = 0.003) were less likely to return to soccer. Bilateral surgery was not found to be a risk factor. CONCLUSION: Hip arthroscopic treatment for FAI in symptomatic competitive soccer players allowed three-quarters of them to return to soccer. Despite not returning to soccer, two-thirds of players who did not return to soccer were satisfied with their outcome. Female and older aged players were less likely to return to soccer. These data can better guide clinicians and soccer players with realistic expectations related to the arthroscopic management of symptomatic FAI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A practical guide to the development and deployment of deep learning models for the orthopedic surgeon: part II.

Deep learning has the potential to be one of the most transformative technologies to impact orthopedic surgery. Substantial innovation in this area has occurred over the past 5 years, but clinically meaningful advancements remain limited by a disconnect between clinical and technical experts. That is, it is likely that few orthopedic surgeons possess both the clinical knowledge necessary to identify orthopedic problems, and the technical knowledge needed to implement deep learning-based solutions. To maximize the utilization of rapidly advancing technologies derived from deep learning models, orthopedic surgeons should understand the steps needed to design, organize, implement, and evaluate a deep learning project and its workflow. Equipping surgeons with this knowledge is the objective of this three-part editorial review. Part I described the processes involved in defining the problem, team building, data acquisition, curation, labeling, and establishing the ground truth. Building on that, this review (Part II) provides guidance on pre-processing and augmenting the data, making use of open-source libraries/toolkits, and selecting the required hardware to implement the pipeline. Special considerations regarding model training and evaluation unique to deep learning models relative to "shallow" machine learning models are also reviewed. Finally, guidance pertaining to the clinical deployment of deep learning models in the real world is provided. As in Part I, the focus is on applications of deep learning for computer vision and imaging.

Artificial Intelligence for Automated Implant Identification in Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter External Validation Study Exceeding 3.5 Million Plain Radiographs.

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of complications following knee arthroplasty demands accurate and timely identification of implant manufacturer and model. Automated image processing using deep machine learning has been previously developed and internally validated; however, external validation is essential prior to scaling clinical implementation for generalizability. METHODS: We trained, validated, and externally tested a deep learning system to classify knee arthroplasty systems as one of the 9 models from 4 manufacturers derived from 4,724 original, retrospectively collected anteroposterior plain knee radiographs across 3 academic referral centers. From these radiographs, 3,568 were used for training, 412 for validation, and 744 for external testing. Augmentation was applied to the training set (n = 3,568,000) to increase model robustness. Performance was determined by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Implant identification processing speed was calculated. The training and testing sets were drawn from statistically different populations of implants (P < .001). RESULTS: After 1,000 training epochs by the deep learning system, the system discriminated 9 implant models with a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.989, accuracy of 97.4%, sensitivity of 89.2%, and specificity of 99.0% in the external testing dataset of 744 anteroposterior radiographs. The software classified implants at a mean speed of 0.02 seconds per image. CONCLUSION: An artificial intelligence-based software for identifying knee arthroplasty implants demonstrated excellent internal and external validation. Although continued surveillance is necessary with implant library expansion, this software represents a responsible and meaningful clinical application of artificial intelligence with immediate potential to globally scale and assist in preoperative planning prior to revision knee arthroplasty.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Mobility Computerized Adaptive Testing Maintains High Correlation and Low Test Burden Compared With Legacy Hip-Specific Instruments in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the lower extremity-specific Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility (MO) bank in patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery at a large academic musculoskeletal specialty center between November 2019 and November 2020 completed the following baseline and 6-month measures: PROMIS MO, PROMIS Pain Interference (PI), PROMIS Physical Function (PF), modified Harris Hip Score, International Hip Outcome Tool 33, visual analog scale, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. Construct validity was evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficients. The number of questions until completion was recorded as a marker of test burden. The percentage of patients scoring at the extreme high (ceiling) or low (floor) for each measure was recorded to measure inclusivity. Responsiveness was tested by comparing differences between baseline and 6-month measures, controlling for age and sex, using generalized estimating equations. Magnitudes of responsiveness were assessed through the effect size (Cohen d). RESULTS: In this study, 660 patients (50% female patients) aged 32 ± 14 years were evaluated. PROMIS MO showed a strong correlation with PROMIS PF (r = 0.84, P < .001), the International Hip Outcome Tool 33 (r = 0.73, P < .001), PROMIS PI (r = -0.76, P < .001), and the modified Harris Hip Score (r = 0.73, P < .001). Neither PROMIS MO, PROMIS PI, nor PROMIS PF met the conventional criteria for floor or ceiling effects (≥15%). The mean number of questions answered (± standard deviation) was 4.7 ± 2.1 for PROMIS MO, 4.1 ± 0.6 for PROMIS PI, and 4.1 ± 0.6 for PROMIS PF. From baseline to 6 months, the PROMIS and legacy measures exhibited significant responsiveness (P < .05), with similar effect sizes between the patient-reported outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: This longitudinal study reveals that in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, PROMIS MO computerized adaptive testing maintains high correlation with legacy hip-specific instruments, significant responsiveness to change, and low test burden compared with legacy measures, with no ceiling or floor effects at 6-month postoperative follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block Does Not Provide Superior Pain Control after Hip Arthroscopy: A Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy is associated with moderate to severe postoperative pain. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study investigates the clinically analgesic effect of anterior quadratus lumborum block with multimodal analgesia compared to multimodal analgesia alone. The authors hypothesized that an anterior quadratus lumborum block with multimodal analgesia would be superior for pain control. METHODS: Ninety-six adult patients undergoing ambulatory hip arthroscopy were enrolled. Patients were randomized to either a single-shot anterior quadratus lumborum block (30 ml bupivacaine 0.5% with 2 mg preservative-free dexamethasone) or no block. All patients received neuraxial anesthesia, IV sedation, and multimodal analgesia (IV acetaminophen and ketorolac). The primary outcome was numerical rating scale pain scores at rest and movement at 30 min and 1, 2, 3, and 24 h. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were enrolled and included in the analysis. Anterior quadratus lumborum block with multimodal analgesia (overall treatment effect, marginal mean [standard error]: 4.4 [0.3]) was not superior to multimodal analgesia alone (overall treatment effect, marginal mean [standard error]: 3.7 [0.3]) in pain scores over the study period (treatment differences between no block and anterior quadratus lumborum block, 0.7 [95% CI, -0.1 to 1.5]; P = 0.059). Postanesthesia care unit antiemetic use, patient satisfaction, and opioid consumption for 0 to 24 h were not significantly different. There was no difference in quadriceps strength on the operative side between groups (differences in means, 1.9 [95% CI, -1.5 to 5.3]; P = 0.268). CONCLUSIONS: Anterior quadratus lumborum block may not add to the benefits provided by multimodal analgesia alone after hip arthroscopy. Anterior quadratus lumborum block did not cause a motor deficit. The lack of treatment effect in this study demonstrates a surgical procedure without benefit from this novel block.

Editorial Commentary: The Pivot Shift and Lachman Examinations: Teammates With Distinct Roles.

The pivot shift and Lachman examinations are "teammates" with complementary but distinct roles in the successful diagnosis and treatment of anterior cruciate ligament rupture and injury to the surrounding soft-tissue envelope of the knee. The Lachman test measures anterior tibial translation in response to an applied anterior tibial load. This test assesses the integrity of the native or reconstructed anterior cruciate ligament and the secondary medial restraints including the medial meniscus and medial collateral ligament. In contrast, the pivot shift exam creates coupled tibiofemoral motions in response to a complex combination of multiplanar loads. This test assesses the stabilizing role of the native or reconstructed anterior cruciate ligament and the secondary lateral restraints including the lateral meniscus and anterolateral complex. The pivot shift grade depends not only on the soft the tissue stabilizers of the knee but also on the shape of the proximal tibia and the distal femur including lateral tibial slope and femoral condylar offset. Both examinations have unique strengths and weaknesses, but when combined as diagnostic tools, they achieve far more collectively than what each can achieve alone.

Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit After Revision Hip Arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: To define minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) in revision hip arthroscopy. METHODS: The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) were administered to revision hip arthroscopy patients. At 1 year postoperatively, patients graded their hip function based on anchor responses. SCB was defined as both a net change and an absolute value. Receiver operating characteristic analysis with area under the curve was used to confirm psychometric values. A distribution-based method was used for MCID. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were included with a mean age of 29.7 (±8.6) years. The most common indication for revision hip arthroscopy was residual femoroacetabular impingement (FAI; N = 34; 69.4%) followed by capsular management (N = 8; 16.3%). At 1-year follow-up, 34 patients reported feeling improved. Outcome score change corresponding to MCID and SCB net change for the mHHS, HOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL), HOS Sports, and iHOT-33 was 7.9/23.1, 7.9/16.2, 13.1/25.0, and 12.8/25.5, respectively. A higher proportion of patients with residual FAI achieved MCID compared with patients with other diagnoses. On the preoperative HOS ADL, HOS Sports, and iHOT-33, patients scoring below 67.7 (0.78), 55.6 (0.81), and 35.7 (0.73) were significantly more likely to achieve SCB postoperatively. Thirty-four patients (73.9%) were classified as receiving physical function improvement, and on the HOS Sports, MCID was achieved by 65% whereas 43% met the SCB criteria. CONCLUSIONS: MCID values ranged from 7.9 on the mHHS and the HOS ADL to 13.1 on the HOS Sports. SCB net change ranged from 16.2 on the HOS ADL to 25.2 on the iHOT-33, whereas absolute SCB ranged from 82.4 on the iHOT-33 to 84.7 on the mHHS. Residual FAI and capsular management were the most common indications for revision surgery with patients who underwent surgery for the former found to be most likely to achieve clinically significant improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Diagnosis of Intraabdominal Fluid Extravasation After Hip Arthroscopy With Point-of-Care Ultrasonography Can Identify Patients at an Increased Risk for Postoperative Pain.

BACKGROUND: Intraabdominal fluid extravasation (IAFE) after hip arthroscopy has historically been diagnosed in catastrophic circumstances with abdominal compartment syndrome requiring diuresis or surgical decompression. A previous retrospective study found the prevalence of symptomatic IAFE requiring diuresis or decompression to be 0.16%, with risk factors including surgical procedure and high pump pressures. IAFE can be diagnosed rapidly by using point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) via the Focused Assessment With Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examination, which is a well-established means to detect free fluid with high specificity and sensitivity. In this study, we used POCUS to determine the incidence of IAFE in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. We predicted a higher incidence and that patients with IAFE would have symptoms of peritoneal irritation such as pain and nausea. METHODS: One hundred patients undergoing ambulatory hip arthroscopy were prospectively enrolled. A FAST examination was performed after induction by a trained anesthesiologist to exclude the preoperative presence of intraperitoneal fluid. Postoperatively, the same anesthesiologist repeated the FAST examination, and patients with new fluid in the abdominal or pelvic peritoneum were diagnosed with IAFE. Patients were followed up in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) for 6 hours assessing pain, antiemetic and opioid use, and length of stay. RESULTS: Sixteen of 100 patients were found to have IAFE (16.0%; 99% confidence interval [CI], 8.4-28.1). These patients had, on average, a greater increase in pain score from their baseline assessment throughout their entire PACU stay (adjusted difference in means [99% CI]: 2.1 points [0.4-3.9]; P = .002). Patients with IAFE used more opioids, but this difference did not meet statistical significance (adjusted difference in means [99% CI]: 7.8 mg oral morphine equivalents [-2.8 to 18.3]; P = .053). There were no differences in postoperative nausea interventions or length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Our incidence of IAFE was 16%, showing that IAFE occurs quite commonly in hip arthroscopy. Patients with IAFE had a greater increase in pain scores from baseline throughout the PACU stay. None of our patients required interventions. These findings suggest that even a small amount of new fluid in the peritoneum may be associated with a worse postoperative experience. This study brings awareness to a common yet potentially life-threatening complication of hip arthroscopy and highlights a unique and meaningful way that anesthesiologists in the perioperative setting can use POCUS to rapidly identify and guide management of these patients. Further studies with a larger sample size are needed to identify surgical and patient risk factors.

High Interspecimen Variability in Engagement of the Anterolateral Ligament: An In Vitro Cadaveric Study.

BACKGROUND: Anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction as an adjunct to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains a subject of clinical debate. This uncertainty may be driven in part by a lack of knowledge regarding where, within the range of knee motion, the ALL begins to carry force (engages). QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does the ALL engage in the ACL-intact knee; and (2) where within the range of anterior tibial translation occurring in the ACL-sectioned knee does the ALL engage? METHODS: A robotic manipulator was used to measure anterior tibial translation, ACL forces, and ALL forces in 10 fresh-frozen cadaveric knees (10 donors; mean age, 41 ± 16 years; range, 20-64 years; eight male) in response to applied multiplanar torques. The engagement point of the ALL was defined as the anterior tibial translation at which the ALL began to carry at least 15% of the force carried by the native ACL; a threshold of 15% minimized the sensitivity of the engagement point of the ALL. This engagement point was compared with the maximum anterior tibial translation permitted in the ACL-intact condition using a paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p < 0.05). Normality of each outcome measure was confirmed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The ALL engaged in five and four of 10 ACL-intact knees in response to multiplanar torques at 15° and 30° of flexion, respectively. Among the nine of 10 knees in which the ALL engaged with the ACL sectioned, the ACL-intact motion limit, and ALL engagement point, respectively, averaged 1.5 ± 1.1 mm and 5.4 ± 4.1 mm at 15° of flexion and 2.0 ± 1.3 mm and 5.7 ± 2.7 mm at 30° of flexion. Thus, the ALL engaged 3.8 ± 3.1 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-6.3 mm; p = 0.027) and 3.7 ± 2.4 mm (95% CI, 2.1-5.3 mm; p = 0.008) beyond the maximum anterior tibial translation of the ACL-intact knee at 15° and 30° of flexion, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this in vitro, cadaveric study, the ALL engaged in up to half of the ACL-intact knees. In the ACL-sectioned knees, the ALL engaged beyond the ACL-intact limit of anterior subluxation on average in response to multiplanar torques, albeit with variability that likely reflects interspecimen heterogeneity in ALL anatomy. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings suggest that surgical variables such as the joint position and tension at which lateral extraarticular grafts and tenodeses are fixed might be able to be tuned to control where within the range of knee motion the graft tissue is engaged to restrain joint motion on a patient-specific basis.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adolescents Provides Clinically Significant Outcome Improvement.

PURPOSE: To define minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for adolescents undergoing arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery. METHODS: A prospective institutional hip preservation registry was reviewed to identify hip arthroscopies performed for FAI. Patients with pre-existing hip conditions such as slipped capital femoral epiphysis and Legg-Calve-Perthese were excluded. Included patients were 18 years and younger. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) were administered as part of the registry. MCID was calculated using a distribution-based method, and SCB was calculated using a physical function anchor question. Receiver operating characteristic analysis with area under the curve (AUC) was used for psychometric analyses. RESULTS: Forty-seven adolescents were identified. The majority of patients were female (n = 32, 68.1%) with a mean age of 16.5 (±1.1) years. The MCID (% achieving) for the mHHS, HOS activities of daily living (ADL), HOS Sport, and iHOT-33 was 9.5 (85%), 9.8 (79%), 12.1 (85%), and 10.7 (94%), respectively. Ninety-two percent of adolescents reported some form of improved hip physical ability on the anchor question. The following 1-year absolute outcome scores were significantly representative of an SCB state on the mHHS, HOS ADL, HOS Sport, and mHHS, respectively (AUC): 93.5 (0.79), 98.5 (0.84), 96.9 (0.81), and 85.9 (0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents undergoing arthroscopic FAI surgery achieve clinically significant outcome improvement. We found that the vast majority of adolescents achieve MCID on hip-specific patient-reported outcome tools. However, although adolescents readily achieve MCID, a considerable improvement in postoperative outcome score is often needed to perceive a substantial benefit (SCB). The available hip outcome tools may be subject to ceiling effects for measuring clinically significant outcome improvement in adolescents. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Anterior Inferior Iliac Spine Morphology and Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy in Soccer Athletes: A Comparison to Nonkicking Athletes.

PURPOSE: To describe the anterior inferior iliac spine (AIIS) morphology and clinical outcomes following arthroscopic surgical decompression in a group of high-level soccer athletes presenting with symptomatic hip impingement when compared with a control group of nonkicking athletes. METHODS: From 2009 to 2012, we retrospectively reviewed our prospective hip registry for soccer athletes who underwent arthroscopic treatment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with 2-year follow-up, comparing with a control group of nonkicking athletes. Demographics were collected and radiographic studies (plain radiograph and computed tomographic scan) reviewed for several parameters, including AIIS morphology. Patient-reported outcome scores, including modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and International Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33), were administered preoperatively, at 6 months, and at 1, 2, and 3 years postoperatively. RESULTS: Twenty-six soccer players (34 hips) and 87 nonkicking athletes (115) hips were identified. Demographics, including age (19.2 ± 4.1 vs 20.1 ± 3.8 years) and gender distribution (53.8% vs 51.7% male), were similar between the soccer and nonkicking athletes (P = .288, .849). Eighty-four percent of soccer players demonstrated some abnormality of the AIIS extending to (type II, 52%) or below the anterior acetabular rim (type III, 32%), compared with 52% nonkicking athletes (P < .001). At a mean follow-up of 35 months (range, 24-57 months) there was significant improvement in all outcome scores in both groups from pre- to postoperation (P < .001). There was no evidence of differences in outcome scores between groups (mHSS: 89 ± 14.6 vs 88.2 ± 14.4, P = .804; HOS-ADL: 94.1 ± 9.1 vs 92.2 ± 11.1, P = .431; HOS-SSS: 86 ± 17.1 vs 81.3 ± 24.3, P = .362) with the exception of iHOT-33 (81.7 ± 19 vs 70.3 ± 23.6, P = .027). CONCLUSIONS: High-level soccer players have a significantly higher rate of subspine impingement compared with nonkicking athletes. There should be a high index of suspicion when treating soccer players for FAI, where appropriate recognition and treatment of subspine impingement can yield excellent clinical results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective case-control study.

Functional Outcomes and Cam Recurrence After Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adolescents.

PURPOSE: To compare the functional outcomes after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in adolescent patients and non-adolescent patients, and to report on the rate of cam recurrence within 2 years after femoral osteoplasty in a limited sample of the adolescent group. METHODS: From 2010 to 2014, patients younger than 18 years with symptomatic FAI (alpha angle >50°) who underwent hip arthroscopy with minimum 2-year follow-up or reoperation were identified. A group of non-adolescent patients with identical inclusion criteria, except age of 18 years or older, was also identified for comparison. In addition, a separate group of adolescent patients with 2-year postoperative radiographs was reviewed for cam recurrence. Demographic data, operative data, and radiographic and clinical outcomes (modified Harris Hip Score [mHHS], Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living [HOS-ADL], Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale [HOS-SSS], and International Hip Outcome Tool 33 [iHOT-33] score) were collected. RESULTS: We identified 34 adolescent patients (38 hips) with an average age of 16 years (range, 13-17 years). The mean clinical follow-up period was 36.1 ± 11.6 months (range, 24.1-71.7 months) and 29.6 ± 2.4 months (range, 27.9-31.3 months) without and with reoperation, respectively. A control group of 296 non-adolescent patients (306 hips), with a mean age of 31 years (range, 18-59 years), was identified as our non-adolescent group. The mean clinical follow-up period was 34.1 ± 11 months (range, 24.0-77.4 months) and 15.1 ± 9.1 months (range, 3.6-34.6 months) without and with reoperation, respectively. Significant improvement was noted in adolescents in the changes in outcome scores (mHHS, 22.2 [95% confidence interval (CI), 15.4-29.0]; HOS-ADL, 18.6 [95% CI, 11.9-25.2]; HOS-SSS, 33.5 [95% CI, 24.5-42.5]; and iHOT-33 score, 30.5 [95% CI, 21.8-39.2]; P < .001). Similar improvements were observed in non-adolescents (mHHS, 21.0 [95% CI, 19.0-23.0]; HOS-ADL, 16.6 [95% CI, 14.6-18.6]; HOS-SSS, 30.1 [95% CI, 26.6-33.6]; and iHOT-33 score, 34.9 [95% CI, 31.5-38.3]; P < .001). There was no evidence of a difference in follow-up survey scores between groups (P > .203). Revision surgery was required in 2 adolescent hips (5.3% [95% CI, 1.5%-17.3%]) and 19 non-adolescent hips (6.2% [95% CI, 4.0%-9.5%]). Minimum 2-year radiographs were available for review in 24 adolescent patients (30 hips). The alpha angle (mean ± standard deviation) was reduced from 55.4° ± 12.1° preoperatively to 38.7° ± 4.9° at 6 weeks postoperatively (mean difference, -16.4° [95% CI, -19.8° to -12.9°]; P < .001). At 2 years, the alpha angle remained at 39.2° ± 11.2°, which did not differ from 6-week measurements (mean difference, 0.5° [95% CI, -2.9° to 3.9°]; P = .784). There were no cases of cam recurrence (0% [95% CI, 0%-11.4%]). CONCLUSIONS: Significant improvement in clinical outcomes can be anticipated after arthroscopic treatment of FAI in adolescents. From a limited sample of our adolescent population, the risk of cam recurrence appears low; however, further follow-up is needed to ensure this does not represent a biased sample of the initial population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Radiographic predictors of femoroacetabular impingement treatment outcomes.

PURPOSE: To review the literature on femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) treatment outcomes, specifically focusing on potential pre-operative radiographic parameters that may provide prognostic information regarding outcomes following surgical management. METHODS: A comprehensive review of computerized literature databases (Medline Ovid and PubMed) was performed, searching for articles reporting on FAI treatment outcomes. A single reviewer screened titles, abstracts and performed full-text reviews of eligible studies. The references of these studies were further screened for additional potentially relevant studies. A total of 243 studies were reviewed, with 18 meeting inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Thirteen arthroscopic studies reported on 1556 patients, with clinical improvement in 35-92 % of patients and associated failure rates of 12-71 %. Five open surgical studies reported on 238 patients with clinical improvement in 65-95 % of patients and associated failure rates of 0-35 %. Both arthroscopic and open studies identified inferior outcomes with pre-operative radiographic findings of an elevated Tönnis grade (grade 2 or higher), joint space <2 mm, lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) <20° and incomplete femoral osteoplasty. CONCLUSION: Pre-operative radiographic findings of osteoarthritis (Tönnis grade 2/3, <2 mm joint space) or dysplasia (LCEA < 20°) should be considered relative contraindications to joint preservation surgery as outcomes are worse among these patients and associated with a higher risk of conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Care should also be taken to perform a thorough femoral osteoplasty to reduce the risk of failure and need for revision surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty: Which type of artificial joint do patients forget?

PURPOSE: During recent years, there has been an intensive growth of interest in the patient's perception of functional outcome. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a recently introduced score that measures joint awareness of patients who have undergone knee arthroplasty and is less limited by ceiling effects. The aim of this study was to compare the FJS between patients who undergo medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and patients who undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA) 1 and 2 years post-operatively. METHODS: This prospective study compares the FJS at a minimum of one (average 1.5 years, range 1.0-1.9) and a minimum of 2 years (average 2.5 years, range 2.0-3.6) post-operatively between patients who underwent medial UKA and TKA. RESULTS: One-hundred and thirty patients were included. Sixty-five patients underwent medial UKA and 65 patients underwent TKA. At both follow-up points, the FJS was significantly higher in the UKA group (FJS 1 year 73.9 ± 22.8, FJS 2 year 74.3 ± 24.8) in contrast to the TKA group (FJS 1 year 59.3 ± 29.5 (p = 0.002), FJS 2 year 59.8 ± 31.5, (p = 0.004)). No significant improvement in the FJS was observed between 1- and 2-year follow-up of the two cohorts. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo UKA are more likely to forget their artificial joint in daily life and consequently may be more satisfied. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

MRI Evaluation of Femoroacetabular Impingement After Hip Preservation Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the surgical treatment options for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), including labral repair and osteochondroplasty, and the expected postoperative appearance on MRI. Complications, including residual osseous deformities, chondral injury, adhesions, femoral neck stress fractures, osteonecrosis, instability, malpositioned suture anchors, and infection, will also be discussed. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of the surgical treatment of FAI can assist in improving our understanding of the expected postoperative MRI appearance and in evaluating surgical complications.