Medical Imaging Applications Developed Using Artificial Intelligence Demonstrate High Internal Validity Yet Are Limited in Scope and Lack External Validation.

PURPOSE: To (1) review definitions and concepts necessary to interpret applications of deep learning (DL; a domain of artificial intelligence that leverages neural networks to make predictions on media inputs such as images) and (2) identify knowledge and translational gaps in the literature to provide insight into specific areas for improvement as adoption of this technology continues. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed in December 2023 for articles regarding the use of DL in sports medicine. For each study, information regarding the joint of focus, specific anatomic structure/pathology to which DL was applied, imaging modality utilized, source of images used for model training and testing, data set size, model performance, and whether the DL model was externally validated was recorded. A numerical scale was used to rate each DL model's clinical impact, with 1 corresponding to proof-of-concept studies with little to no direct clinical impact and 5 corresponding to practice-changing clinical impact and ready for clinical deployment. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies were identified, all of which were published within the past 5 years, while 82% were published within the past 3 years. Of the DL models identified, 84% were developed for classification tasks, 9% for automated measurements, and 7% for segmentation. A total of 62% of studies utilized magnetic resonance imaging as the imaging modality, 25% radiographs, and 7% ultrasound, while 1 study each used computed tomography, arthroscopic images, or arthroscopic video. Sixty-five percent of studies focused on the detection of tears (anterior cruciate ligament [ACL], rotator cuff [RC], and meniscus). The diagnostic performance of ACL tears, as determined by the area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC), ranged from 0.81 to 0.99 for ACL tears (excellent to near perfect), 0.83 to 0.94 for RC tears (excellent), and from 0.75 to 0.96 for meniscus tears (acceptable to excellent). In addition, 3 studies focused on detection of cartilage lesions had AUROC ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 (excellent performance). However, only 4 (7%) studies externally validated their models, suggesting that they may not be generalizable or may not perform well when applied to populations other than that used to develop the model. Finally, the mean clinical impact score was 2 (range, 1-3) on scale of 1 to 5, corresponding to limited clinical applicability. CONCLUSIONS: DL models in orthopaedic sports medicine show generally excellent performance (high internal validity) but require external validation to facilitate clinical deployment. In addition, current models have low clinical applicability and fail to advance the field due to a focus on routine tasks and a narrow conceptual framework. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, scoping review of Level I to IV studies.

Hip Arthroscopy Simulator Training With Immersive Virtual Reality Has Similar Effectiveness to Nonimmersive Virtual Reality.

PURPOSE: To (1) compare the efficacy of immersive virtual reality (iVR) to nonimmersive virtual reality (non-iVR) training in hip arthroscopy on procedural and knowledge-based skills acquisition and (2) evaluate the relative cost of each platform. METHODS: Fourteen orthopaedic surgery residents were randomized to simulation training utilizing an iVR Hip Arthroscopy Simulator (n = 7; PrecisionOS) or non-iVR simulator (n = 7; ArthroS Hip VR; VirtaMed). After training, performance was assessed on a cadaver by 4 expert hip arthroscopists through arthroscopic video review of a diagnostic hip arthroscopy. Performance was assessed using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) and Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET) scores. A cost analysis was performed using the transfer effectiveness ratio (TER) and a direct cost comparison of iVR to non-iVR. RESULTS: Demographic characteristics did not differ between treatment arms or by training level, hip arthroscopy experience, or prior simulator use. No significant differences were observed in OSATS and ASSET scores between iVR and non-iVR cohorts (OSATS: iVR 19.6 ± 4.4, non-iVR 21.0 ± 4.1, P = .55; ASSET: iVR 23.7 ± 4.5, non-iVR 25.8 ± 4.8, P = .43). The absolute TER was 0.06 and there was a 132-fold cost difference of iVR to non-iVR. CONCLUSIONS: Hip arthroscopy simulator training with iVR had similar performance results to non-iVR for technical skill and procedural knowledge acquisition after expert arthroscopic video assessment. The iVR platform had similar effectiveness in transfer of skill compared to non-iVR with a 132 times cost differential. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Due to the accessibility, effectiveness, and relative affordability, iVR training may be beneficial in the future of safe arthroscopic hip training.

A practical guide to the development and deployment of deep learning models for the orthopaedic surgeon: Part III, focus on registry creation, diagnosis, and data privacy.

Deep learning is a subset of artificial intelligence (AI) with enormous potential to transform orthopaedic surgery. As has already become evident with the deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT (OpenAI Inc.), deep learning can rapidly enter clinical and surgical practices. As such, it is imperative that orthopaedic surgeons acquire a deeper understanding of the technical terminology, capabilities and limitations associated with deep learning models. The focus of this series thus far has been providing surgeons with an overview of the steps needed to implement a deep learning-based pipeline, emphasizing some of the important technical details for surgeons to understand as they encounter, evaluate or lead deep learning projects. However, this series would be remiss without providing practical examples of how deep learning models have begun to be deployed and highlighting the areas where the authors feel deep learning may have the most profound potential. While computer vision applications of deep learning were the focus of Parts I and II, due to the enormous impact that natural language processing (NLP) has had in recent months, NLP-based deep learning models are also discussed in this final part of the series. In this review, three applications that the authors believe can be impacted the most by deep learning but with which many surgeons may not be familiar are discussed: (1) registry construction, (2) diagnostic AI and (3) data privacy. Deep learning-based registry construction will be essential for the development of more impactful clinical applications, with diagnostic AI being one of those applications likely to augment clinical decision-making in the near future. As the applications of deep learning continue to grow, the protection of patient information will become increasingly essential; as such, applications of deep learning to enhance data privacy are likely to become more important than ever before. Level of Evidence: Level IV.

High Rate of Concomitant Lumbo-Sacral Spine Pathology in the Setting of Hip Abductor Tendon Repair.

BACKGROUND: Hip abductor deficiency is a common cause of lateral hip pain in middle-aged patients. Identifying upstream muscle denervation originating in the lumbo-sacral spine could potentially impact the management of patients who have abductor deficiency. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of lumbo-sacral pathology (L4 to S1) in patients undergoing hip abductor tendon repair. METHODS: All cases of primary hip abductor repair performed at a tertiary care center between January 2010 and December 2021 were reviewed. Patients were classified into the following groups: A) Confirmed L4 to S1 disease based on preoperative or perioperative L4 to S1 interventions (i.e., surgery, epidural injections, and/or positive electromyography findings); B) Radiographic evidence on lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrating nerve compression at L4 to S1; and C) No evidence of L4 to S1 disease. RESULTS: There were 131 cases of primary hip abductor repair that were included. Over 80% of patients were women, who had a mean age of 64 years (range, 20 to 85). There were thirteen patients (9.9%) who underwent concomitant total hip arthroplasty (THA). Of the included patients, 29% (n = 38) were categorized into group A, 12% (n = 16) into group B, and 59% (n = 77) into group C. Patients who had L4 to S1 pathology were older than patients who did not have L4 to S1 pathology (67 versus 61 years, P = 0.004). Of the patients undergoing concomitant THA and hip abductor repair, 54% demonstrated evidence of lumbo-sacral spine pathology. CONCLUSIONS: Over 40% of patients undergoing isolated hip abductor tendon repair and >50% of patients undergoing concomitant hip abductor tendon repair and THA demonstrated evidence of L4 to S1 disease perioperatively. Patients demonstrating symptomatic hip abductor deficiency should be screened for concomitant lower lumbo-sacral spine pathology.

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.

Natural language processing: using artificial intelligence to understand human language in orthopedics.

Natural language processing (NLP) describes the broad field of artificial intelligence by which computers are trained to understand and generate human language. Within healthcare research, NLP is commonly used for variable extraction and classification/cohort identification tasks. While these tools are becoming increasingly popular and available as both open-source and commercial products, there is a paucity of the literature within the orthopedic space describing the key tasks within these powerful pipelines. Curation and navigation of the electronic medical record are becoming increasingly onerous, and it is important for physicians and other healthcare professionals to understand potential methods of harnessing this large data resource. The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the tasks required to develop an NLP pipeline for orthopedic research and present recent examples of successful implementations.

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

Deep learning has a profound impact on daily life. As Orthopedics makes use of this rapid escalation in technology, Orthopedic surgeons will need to take leadership roles on deep learning projects. Moreover, surgeons must possess an understanding of what is necessary to design and implement deep learning-based project pipelines. This review provides a practical guide for the Orthopedic surgeon to understand the steps needed to design, develop, and deploy a deep learning pipeline for clinical applications. A detailed description of the processes involved in defining the problem, building the team, acquiring and curating the data, labeling the data, establishing the ground truth, pre-processing and augmenting the data, and selecting the required hardware is provided. In addition, an overview of unique considerations involved in the training and evaluation of deep learning models is provided. This review strives to provide surgeons with the groundwork needed to identify gaps in the clinical landscape that deep learning models may be able to fill and equips them with the knowledge needed to lead an interdisciplinary team through the process of creating novel deep-learning-based solutions to fill those gaps.

Evaluation for clinical benefit of metformin in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a national claims-based cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic progressive lung disease with high morbidity and limited treatment options. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a common comorbid illness among patients with IPF and is often treated with metformin, the first-line agent in the management of T2DM. There is growing evidence demonstrating metformin's anti-fibrotic properties; however, there is little real-world clinical data regarding its potential effectiveness in IPF. This study aims to evaluate the clinical benefit of metformin in patients with IPF and T2DM. METHODS: This nationwide cohort study used de-identified administrative claims data from OptumLabs® Data Warehouse to identify 3599 adults with IPF and concomitant T2DM between January 1, 2014 and June 30, 2019. Two cohorts were created: a cohort treated with metformin (n = 1377) and a cohort not treated with metformin (n = 2222). A final 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort compared 1100 patients with IPF and T2DM receiving metformin to those with both diagnoses but not receiving metformin; matching accounted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, residence region, year, medications, oxygen use, smoking status, healthcare use, and comorbidities. Outcomes were all-cause mortality (primary) and hospitalizations (secondary). RESULTS: Among 2200 patients with IPF and T2DM included in this matched analysis, metformin therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.58; p < 0.001) and hospitalizations (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.93; p = 0.003) compared to patients not receiving metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with IPF and T2DM, metformin therapy may be associated with improved clinical outcomes. However, further investigation with randomized clinical trials is necessary prior to metformin's broad implementation in the clinical management of IPF.

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.

Dynamic Assessment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Hips.

PURPOSE: The purpose of our study was to compare lower extremity rotational kinematics and kinetics (angles, torques, and powers) and hip muscle electromyography (EMG) activity between cam-type femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and age- and sex-matched controls during walking, fast walking, stair ascent, stair descent, and sit-to-stand. METHODS: This study included 10 males with unilateral FAIS and 10 control males with no FAIS. We measured kinematics, kinetics, and electromyographic signals during stair ascent/descent, sit-to-stand, self-selected walk, and fast walk. Peak signal differences between groups were compared with independent t-tests with statistical significance when P < .05. RESULTS: FAIS hips showed significant differences compared to controls, including increased hip flexion during walking (+4.9°, P = .048) and stair ascent (+7.8°, P =.003); diminished trunk rotation during stair ascent (-3.4°; P = .015), increased knee flexion during self-selected walking (+5.1°, P = .009), stair ascent (+7.4°, P = .001), and descent (+5.3°, P = .038); and increased knee valgus during fast walking (+4.7°, P = .038). gMed and MedHam showed significantly decreased activation in FAIS during walking (gMed: -12.9%, P = .002; MedHam: -7.4%, P = .028) and stair ascent (gMed: -16.7%, P = .036; MedHam: -13.0%, P = .041); decreased gMed activation during sit-to-stand (-8.8%, P = .004) and decreased MedHam activation during stair descent (-8.0%, P = .039). CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional motion analysis and EMG evaluation of functional kinematics and kinetics in subjects with symptomatic unilateral cam-type FAIS across a spectrum of provocative tasks demonstrated significant differences compared to controls in hip flexion, trunk rotation, knee flexion, and valgus. FAIS hips had significantly decreased gMed and MedHam activity. These findings may explain altered torso-pelvic, hip, and knee mechanics in FAIS patients and suggest that evaluation of FAIS should include the patient's hip, knee, and torso-pelvic relationships and muscle function. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The clinical and functional manifestation of FAIS hip pathomechanics is not entirely understood, and previous literature to date has not clearly described the alterations in gait and functional movements seen in patients with cam-type FAIS. The current study used 3D motion analysis and EMG evaluation of functional kinematics and kinetics to identify a number of differences between FAIS and control hips, which help us better understand the lower extremity kinematics and kinetics and muscle activation in FAIS.

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.

Outcomes for hospitalized patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis treated with antifibrotic medications.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis is a chronic, progressive interstitial lung disease for which there is no cure. However, lung function decline, hospitalizations, and mortality may be reduced with the use of the antifibrotic medications, nintedanib and pirfenidone. Historical outcomes for hospitalized patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis are grim; however there is a paucity of data since the approval of nintedanib and pirfenidone for treatment. In this study, we aimed to determine the effect of nintedanib and pirfenidone on mortality following respiratory-related hospitalizations, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mechanical ventilation. METHODS: Using a large U.S. insurance database, we created a one-to-one propensity score matched cohort of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis treated and untreated with an antifibrotic who underwent respiratory-related hospitalization between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018. Mortality was evaluated at 30 days and end of follow-up (up to 2 years). Subgroup analyses were performed for all patients receiving treatment in an ICU and those receiving invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation during the index hospitalization. RESULTS: Antifibrotics were not observed to effect utilization of mechanical ventilation or ICU treatment during the index admission or effect mortality at 30-days. If patients survived hospitalization, mortality was reduced in the treated cohort compared to the untreated cohort when followed up to two years (20.1% vs 47.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with antifibrotic medications does not appear to directly improve 30-day mortality during or after respiratory-related hospitalizations. Post-hospital discharge, however, ongoing antifibrotic treatment was associated with improved long-term survival.

Editorial Commentary: Hip Arthroscopy in the Professional Athlete Back in the Game.

With improved outcomes and expanding indications, the rate of hip arthroscopy for treatment of numerous pathologies has increased. There is significant interest from patients and providers alike regarding return to meaningful play after surgical intervention, particularly for the professional athlete. Although each athlete and each sport have unique obstacles, the literature suggests hip arthroscopy has a high success rate and allows for elite athletes to return to play without significant differences in postoperative performance scores.

Patients' Expectations of Hip Preservation Surgery: A Survey Study.

PURPOSE: To administer the Hip Preservation Surgery Expectations Survey to a large sample of patients to ascertain the prevalence of their preoperative expectations and to assess expectations in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. METHODS: Consecutive patients were enrolled if they were ≥18 years old/spoke English and excluded if they had prior hip surgery/degenerative changes Tönnis ≥2. Patients completed the 21-item survey addressing the amount of improvement expected for each item (number of items and an overall score were determined) and the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT; hip score determined). Analyses included multivariable regression with survey score and number of expectations as dependent variables. Subanalyses considered collegiate/professional, competitive, and recreational sports level. RESULTS: Three hundred two patients participated, with a mean age of 32; 270 (89%) had cam impingement, 72 (24%) had symptoms <6 months, and mean iHOT score was 41. One hundred twenty patients (40%) selected all 21 survey items, 112 (37%) selected 18 to 20, and 70 (23%) selected ≤17 items. In multivariable analysis, younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.3; P = .02), symptoms <6 months (OR = 1.3; P = .03), and worse iHOT score (OR = 2.5; P = .0001) were associated with selecting more items. The mean survey score was 80 (range, 31-100). In multivariable analysis, younger age (P = .05), symptoms <6 months (P = .01), and worse iHOT score (P = .03) were associated with greater survey scores. Collegiate/professional athletes selected more items (P = .01) and were more likely to select improvement in sports performance (OR = 7.5; P = .001), achievement of athletic potential (OR = 3.7; P = .002), and maintaining options for more demanding future activities (OR = 2.7; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients had multiple expectations for marked improvement in current and future physical function and psychological well-being. Younger patients, shorter symptom duration, and worse hip-specific functional status were associated with greater expectations. Understanding patients' expectations can guide preoperative education regarding realistic expectations for recovery and long-term outcome. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients' preoperative expectations vary according to demographic and clinical characteristics as measured in a survey study.

A Shift in Hip Arthroscopy Use by Patient Age and Surgeon Volume: A New York State-Based Population Analysis 2004 to 2016.

PURPOSE: To perform a population-level analysis of the shifts in use of hip arthroscopy by different age groups and to describe the proportion of hip arthroscopy procedures performed by high-volume surgeons. METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was combined with New York State census data to calculate changes in annual hip arthroscopy incidence by age and gender (2004-16). Annual (January to January) surgeon volumes were calculated and stratified into 4 thresholds that have been associated with significant differences in revision hip surgery rates to calculate changes in hip arthroscopy rates by surgeon volume over time. RESULTS: There was a 495% increase in hip arthroscopies from 2004 to 2016, from 2.35 to 15.47 per 100,000 residents in New York State. The largest increase was in the 10-19 years age group-a 2,150% increase for female patients (= 1.26, P < .001) and a 1,717% increase for male patients (incident rate ratio = 1.21, P < .001). The number of labral repairs performed with femoroplasty increased 52.8% (P < .001). The number of hip arthroscopy surgeons increased from 3.4 to 6.5 per 1 million residents. The number of hip arthroscopies performed by high-volume surgeons increased from 0% in 2004 to 24.7% in 2016. CONCLUSIONS: The use of hip arthroscopy has increased over the past 10 years, especially in the adolescent population ages 10-19. Over the same time period, there has been an emergence of high-volume hip arthroscopy surgeons and an increased proportion of procedures performed by these surgeons. Patients of high-volume surgeons tend to be younger, while lower volume surgeons tend to have older patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Overlap of interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features with undifferentiated connective tissue disease and contribution of UIP to mortality.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Criteria for interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF) were recently established for research purposes in a joint statement from the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and American Thoracic Society (ATS). We reviewed the utility of these criteria in patients previously diagnosed as broadly defined undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD) and noted overlapping IPAF findings. Additional review was given to IPAF patients with usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) on histopathology or radiology in terms of survival and outcome. METHODS: Patients with prior UCTD-interstitial lung disease (ILD) were screened by ERS/ATS criteria for IPAF. Clinical data along with all-cause mortality were collated and compared with selected idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) patients from the same study period. Survival was compared between IPAF subgroups with and without UIP features. RESULTS: One hundred and one UCTD-ILD subjects (91%) evaluated from 2005 to 2012 also met strict criteria for IPAF. Frequent clinical findings included Raynaud's phenomenon, positive anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) and non-specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) pattern on chest computed tomography (CT). Nineteen had features of UIP either on histopathology or CT imaging. As compared with IPF, IPAF patients had overall better survival except in those with UIP features. CONCLUSION: Current IPAF criteria encompassed the majority of broadly defined UCTD-ILD and included those with UIP findings. Survival compared with IPF in those with UIP was similar. Further studies are necessary to refine IPAF definitions for clinical use and guide directed management strategies.

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.