A retrospective cohort study: dual cannula combined with modified shoelace continuous capsular closure technique versus nonrepair in hip arthroscopic surgery of femoroacetabular impingement.

BACKGROUND: Over the years, with the improvement of diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities for hip joint diseases and the advancements in surgical technology, hip arthroscopy has been extensively used. At present, there is ongoing controversy among scholars about whether it is necessary to close the joint capsule after hip arthroscopy. In addition, the clinical effect of repairing the hip joint capsule after hip arthroscopy remains uncertain. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of our modified shoelace suture technique on postoperative hip function and to investigate whether complete closure of the hip capsule is reliable and safe. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study; Levels of evidence: III. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients undergoing hip arthroscopy by a solitary high-volume hip arthroscopic surgeon. The patients were categorized into two groups. The first group consisted of patients who underwent the modified shoelace continuous capsular closure technique. The other group consisted of those who did not receive capsular closure after hip arthroscopy. Patient-reported outcomes including modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score of Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analogue scale (VAS) were obtained at a minimum of 12 months. Any complications during follow-up were identified and recorded. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were followed up for 12-15 months, with an average of (12.3 ± 5.3) months in the study. There were 50 patients in the shoelace capsular closure group (CC group) and 50 patients in the non-capsular closure group (NC group). The surgical time in the suture group was significantly longer than that in the non-suture group. However, there was no statistically significant disparity in the length of hospital stay between the two groups. The mHHS, HOS-SSS, HOS-ADL, and VAS of the CC and NC group were significantly improved compared to preoperative scores at 6 and 12 postoperative months (P < 0.001). Compared with the NC group, the CC group showed a significant improvement in the mHHS, HOS-SSS, HOS-ADL, and VAS at 6 postoperative months (t = 4.885, P<0.001; t = 5.984, P<0.001; t = 4.279, P<0.001; t = 3.875, P<0.001). The mHHS, HOS-SSS, HOS-ADL, and VAS at 12 postoperative months were significantly better in the CC group than in the NC group (t = 5.165, P<0.001; t = 3.697, P<0.001; t = 4.840, P<0.001; t = 3.579, P = 0.001). There were no serious complications during the perioperative period. CONCLUSION: The modified shoelace continuous capsular closure technique is a reliable and secure method that can be used as an alternative to the conventional capsular closure. It is recommended to perform routine intraoperative repair of the articular capsule at the end of hip arthroscopy, as this has a positive influences on the functional results at short-term follow-up.

Females and Males Achieve Similar Improvement, Outcomes, and Survivorship Following Hip Arthroscopy with Labral and Capsular Repair for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome at Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of patient sex on 10-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship after hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). METHODS: Patients who underwent primary HA for FAIS with minimum 10-year follow-up from 1/2012-12/2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Female patients were propensity-matched to male patients in a 1:1 ratio by age and body mass index. PROs and rates of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) achievement were compared between cohorts. Rate of reoperation-free survivorship was compared between sexes. RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty-one- females (age: 36.2 ± 12.3 years) were matched to 121 males (age: 35.7 ± 11.3 years, p = 0.594) at average follow-up of 10.4 ± 0.4 years. There were no differences in any preoperative demographic characteristics between the groups (p ≥ 0.187). Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in every PRO measure between the preoperative and 10-year postoperative time points (p < 0.001). The magnitude of improvement was similar between the groups for all PRO measures (p ≥ 0.139). At 10-years, female patients trended towards higher MCID achievement for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) than male patients (72.7% vs. 57.3%, p = 0.061), with otherwise similar MCID achievement rates. Females trended towards significantly lower HOS-Sports Subscale PASS achievement (65.4% vs. 77.1%, p = 0.121) with otherwise similar PASS achievement rates between the groups (p ≥ 0.170). CONCLUSION: Female and male patients experienced similar improvement in PROs at ten-year follow-up. MCID and PASS achievement rates were predominantly similar between sexes. Survivorship did not differ between groups. Long-term success can be expected for appropriately indicated patients undergoing HA for FAIS, regardless of sex. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Retrospective Cohort Study.

Moderate burden amongst caregivers posthip arthroscopy linked to younger caregiver age and task load: A cross-sectional survey study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the burden experienced by primary informal caregivers of patients who have undergone hip arthroscopy and to identify factors that predict increased caregiver burden. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at a single academic hospital centre, enroling caregivers of patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between November 2018 and November 2023. Caregiver burden was assessed using the Caregiver Burden Inventory (CBI) survey. Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify predictors of caregiver burden, with the global CBI score serving as the primary outcome measure. Secondarily, open-ended survey questions were analyzed qualitatively to elucidate specific challenges and facilitators of caregiving, as reported by the caregivers themselves. RESULTS: The study involved 99 eligible caregivers (mean [standard deviation] age; 47 [11] years), 58% were female, and 85% were relatives of the patient. The median global CBI score was 13.0 (interquartile range: 8.0-22.4), indicating a moderate burden. Regression analyses demonstrated that younger caregiver age and a higher number of caregiving tasks were significant predictors of increased global burden. Additionally, nonweightbearing status of patients, female gender of caregivers and working full-time statistically significantly increased specific dimensions of caregiver burden. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the meaningful burden faced by caregivers of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, despite its minimally invasive nature and outpatient setting. Identified risk factors such as younger caregiver age, female gender of the caregiver, nonweight-bearing status and increased caregiving tasks suggest targeted areas for intervention. The qualitative analysis revealed that caregivers struggle with time management and physical and emotional strain, yet better communication and practical support from healthcare teams could help to alleviate these challenges. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic study.

Risk factors for prolonged opioid consumption following hip arthroscopy: A secondary analysis of the Femoroacetabular Impingement RandomiSed controlled Trial and embedded cohort study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to identify prognostic risk factors for prolonged opioid use at 2 and 6 weeks after hip arthroscopy using data from the Femoroacetabular Impingement RandomiSed controlled Trial and its external validation cohort study. METHODS: Opioids were prescribed for postoperative pain management at the surgeon's discretion, with a majority being prescribed a combination of oxycodone and paracetamol (5/325 mg). Prolonged opioid use was defined as the ongoing use of any dosage of opioids reported at either 2 or 6 weeks after surgery to treat femoroacetabular impingement, as recorded in the patient's study medication log. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to evaluate patient and surgical characteristics, such as preoperative opioid use, type of surgical procedure and intraoperative cartilage state that may be associated with prolonged opioid use at either 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 265 and 231 patients were included for analysis at 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively, respectively. The median age of participants was 35 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 27-42) and 33% were female. At 2 weeks postoperatively, female sex (odds ratio [OR]: 2.56; 95% confidence interval: [CI] 1.34-4.98, p = 0.005), higher body mass index (BMI) (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.02-1.18, p = 0.009), active tobacco use (OR: 4.06; 95% CI: 1.90-8.97, p < 0.001), preoperative opioid use (OR: 10.1; 95% CI: 3.25-39.1, p < 0.001) and an Outerbridge classification of ≥3 (OR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.25-4.43, p = 0.009) were significantly associated with prolonged opioid use. At 6 weeks postoperatively, only preoperative opioid use was significantly associated with prolonged opioid consumption (OR: 10.6; 95% CI: 3.60-32.6, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative opioid use was significantly associated with continued opioid use at 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Specific patient factors including female sex, higher BMI, active tobacco use and more severe cartilage damage should be considered in developing targeted strategies to limit opioid use after surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Noninterportal capsulotomy of hip arthroscopy showed improved outcomes in borderline hip dysplasia: A retrospective study with minimum 2-year follow-up.

PURPOSE: The present study aimed to evaluate the functional outcomes of hip arthroscopy using a noninterportal capsulotomy technique to address labral tears in patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD). Additionally, we also compared these outcomes with those of patients with BHD who underwent the standard repaired interportal capsulotomy (RIPC) arthroscopy. METHODS: Data from patients with BHD were retrieved from a database of patients who underwent arthroscopic hip surgery with noninterportal capsulotomy or RIPC to treat labral tears between January 2014 and December 2020. Data collected included both pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: A total of 58 patients (noninterportal capsulotomy, n = 37; RIPC, n = 21) with a mean age of 30.9 ± 5.6 and 28.6 ± 5.5 years, respectively, met the inclusion criteria. All of the patients underwent a minimal 2-year follow-up. The mean lateral centre-edge angle was 23.3 ± 1.2° in the noninterportal capsulotomy group and 23.7 ± 1.0° in the RIPC group, with no significant difference. The PROs improved from the preoperative to the latest follow-up, with a p < 0.001. There were no differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: Using strict patient selection criteria, hip arthroscopy with noninterportal capsulotomy demonstrated significant pre- to postoperative improvements in patients with BHD and achieved results comparable to those from hip arthroscopy with RIPC. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Save the subchondral bone plate: Debridement versus bone marrow stimulation in acetabular cartilage defects over 60 months of follow-up.

PURPOSE: Bone marrow stimulation is a common treatment for full-thickness cartilage defects in the hip joint. However, common procedures may result in poor fibrous repair tissue and changes to the subchondral anatomy. This study investigated the clinical outcome of a cohort of International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grades 3 and 4 cartilage defects treated with bone marrow stimulation compared to those who received simple debridement/chondroplasty. METHODS: In this retrospective registry study, 236 patients with uni-focal acetabular chondral lesions of the hip up to 400 mm² (mean 177.4 ± 113.4 mm²) and of ICRS grade ≥3 with follow-up of at least 12 months (mean 33.2 ± 15.3 months) were included. Eighty-one patients underwent bone marrow stimulation (microfracture: n = 44, abrasion: n = 37) besides treatment of the underlying pathology, 155 patients underwent defect debridement/chondroplasty. The patient-reported outcome was measured using the International Hip Outcome Tool 33 (iHOT33) score and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain. RESULTS: iHOT33 and VAS both improved highly statistically significantly (p < 0.001) in the debridement group after 6, 12, 24, 36 and 60 months compared to the preoperative scores, whereas iHOT33 and VAS after microfracture or abrasion did not show statistically significant changes over time. Twenty-four and sixty months postsurgery the debridement group revealed significant higher scores in the iHOT33 compared to the bone marrow stimulation groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with chondral lesions of the hip ≤400 mm2 sustainably benefit from arthroscopic debridement under preservation of the subchondral bone plate in terms of functional outcome and pain in contrast to patients treated with bone marrow stimulation. These findings discourage the currently recommended use of microfracture in the hip joint. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

The Otto Aufranc Award: Does Hip Arthroscopy at the Time of Periacetabular Osteotomy Improve the Clinical Outcome for the Treatment of Hip Dysplasia? A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: A periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is often sufficient to treat the symptoms and improve quality of life for symptomatic hip dysplasia. However, acetabular cartilage and labral pathologies are very commonly present, and there is a lack of evidence examining the benefits of adjunct arthroscopy to treat these. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of patients undergoing PAO with and without arthroscopy, with the primary end point being the International Hip Outcome Tool-33 at 1 year. METHODS: In a multicenter study, 203 patients who had symptomatic hip dysplasia were randomized: 97 patients undergoing an isolated PAO (mean age 27 years [range, 16 to 44]; mean body mass index of 25.1 [range, 18.3 to 37.2]; 86% women) and 91 patients undergoing PAO who had an arthroscopy (mean age 27 years [range, 16 to 49]; mean body mass index of 25.1 [17.5 to 25.1]; 90% women). RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 2.3 years (range, 1 to 5), all patients exhibited improvements in their functional score, with no significant differences between PAO plus arthroscopy versus PAO alone at 12 months postsurgery on all scores: preoperative International Hip Outcome Tool-33 score of 31.2 (standard deviation [SD] 16.0) versus 36.4 (SD 15.9), and 12 months postoperative score of 72.4 (SD 23.4) versus 73.7 (SD 22.6). The preoperative Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome pain score was 60.3 (SD 19.6) versus 66.1 (SD 20.0) and 12 months postoperative 88.2 (SD 15.8) versus 88.4 (SD 18.3). The mean preoperative physical health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System score was 42.5 (SD 8.0) versus 44.2 (SD 8.8) and 12 months postoperative 48.7 (SD 8.5) versus 52.0 (SD 10.6). There were 4 patients with PAO without arthroscopy who required an arthroscopy later to resolve persistent symptoms, and 1 patient from the PAO plus arthroscopy group required an additional arthroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial has failed to show any significant clinical benefit in performing hip arthroscopy at the time of the PAO at 1-year follow-up. Longer follow-up will be required to determine if hip arthroscopy provides added value to a PAO for symptomatic hip dysplasia.

Prior hip arthroscopy increases the risk of dislocation, reoperation, and revision after hip arthroplasty: An updated meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The indications for hip arthroscopy have been increasing, as have been the number of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) after hip arthroscopy. Several matched cohort studies have assessed the impact of prior hip arthroscopy on THA, but conflicting results have been observed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of prior arthroscopy on subsequent THA. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist. PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. Dichotomous variables were summarized qualitatively as a meta-analysis of pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and continuous variables were summarized as standardized mean differences and 95% CIs. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. The risk of bias was evaluated for each study, as was publication bias. RESULTS: In patients who underwent hip arthroscopy prior to THA, the ORs for dislocation, reoperation, and revision were 2.02 (P = 0.01), 1.66 (P = 0.01), and 2.15 (P = 0.001), respectively. There were no significant between-group differences in the Harris Hip Score (HHS; P = 0.40), WOMAC (P = 0.069), FJS-12 (P = 0.77), estimated blood loss (P = 0.48), and surgical time (P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Prior hip arthroscopy is a risk for postoperative dislocation, reoperation, or revision after conversion THA. However, prior hip arthroscopy has no effect on patient-reported outcomes, or operative factors such as surgical time and blood loss.

Patient Satisfaction with Postoperative Telemedicine Versus In-Office Visits Following Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Prospective Observational Study Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Abstract Background: The purpose of this study was to compare satisfaction with postoperative telemedicine visits versus in-office visits among patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted involving subjects ≥18 years old undergoing primary hip arthroscopy at a single center from January 2020 to February 2021. Subjects chose between a telemedicine or in-office visit for 6-week follow-up. Patient satisfaction after the 6-week visit was assessed using an electronic survey. The primary outcome was satisfaction on a scale from 0 to 10. Intergroup comparisons of outcomes were performed using Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, or Fisher's exact test. p-Values <0.05 were considered significant. Results: Seventy-five patients (28M and 47F) were enrolled in the study with mean age 41.2 ± 12.7 years. Forty-four patients (58.7%) attended in-office visits and 31 (41.3%) attended telemedicine visits. There were no significant intergroup differences in age, gender, body mass index, or American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (p > 0.05). There were no significant intergroup differences in satisfaction with overall care (in-office 9.6 vs. telemedicine 9.3, p = 0.08) or the 6-week visit (in-office 9.0 vs. telemedicine 8.0, p = 0.06). The telemedicine group more frequently reported visits taking <20 min (p = 0.002) and spending >10 min with their surgeon (p = 0.01). However, 51.6% of the telemedicine group and 74.7% of the entire cohort expressed a retrospective preference for in-office visits. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in satisfaction scores between hip arthroscopy patients assigned to telemedicine versus in-office visits for 6-week follow-up, but most patients expressed a preference for in-office visits.

Current concepts in the diagnosis and management of Os Acetabuli.

PURPOSE: The aim of this review is to appraise the current evidence on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and management of os acetabuli. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. A systematic search was performed on Medline (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria comprised observational and interventional studies and review articles published in the English language that focused on patients with os acetabuli according to the PRISMA extension of scoping reviews checklist using the terms 'Os Acetabuli' or 'os acetabula' or 'acetabular ossicles'. A narrative synthesis of results was undertaken, and the included articles were divided into (i) definition, (ii) aetiology, (iii) diagnosis and imaging and (iv) management of os acetabuli. RESULTS: 107 articles were screened, with 22 meeting the eligibility criteria. A total of 8836 patients were considered, of which 604 had os acetabuli. The mean age was 32.8 years. The prevalence of os acetabuli ranged from 3.4 to 7.7%, with a higher prevalence in males compared to females. True os acetabuli was defined as an unfused secondary ossification centre along the acetabular rim. The aetiology of os acetabuli is thought to be secondary to acetabular dysplasia and/or femoroacetabular impingement. Standard of care for management of symptomatic os acetabuli is considered to be arthroscopic excision unless the excision results in acetabular undercoverage and/or instability, in which case, fixation is recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Successful management of os acetabuli depends on understanding the pathology and treating the underlying cause rather than treating the os acetabuli in isolation. Future work needs to focus on establishing clear diagnostic criteria, consensus on definition and an evidence-based treatment algorithm.

Assessment of function and muscle strength after endoscopic iliopsoas tenotomy to treat iliopsoas impingement after total hip arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the functional outcome during follow-up (FU) after endoscopic tenotomy for iliopsoas (IP)-cup impingement and to quantitatively analyze the hip flexion strength. METHODS: This was a monocentric, retrospective cohort study of a single surgeon series. Functional assessment was based on the modified Harris score, the Oxford score and the visual analog scale score. Strength was measured with a handheld dynamometer in the sitting and lying position. RESULTS: Thirty-six IP tenotomies for cup impingement were performed between May 2013 and November 2021. Seven (19%) patients were lost to FU. At the time of tenotomy, the mean (standard deviation) age was 62,6 (12,2) and BMI was 26,5 (4,1). The mean FU time after tenotomy to the last FU was 3,6 (0,8) years. All three outcome scores improved from preoperatively to six months postoperatively (p < 0.001). There were no significant change from six months to last FU. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the modified Harris score was set at 25. 20 (69%) patients had values that exceeded the threshold at one month and six months and neutral 19 (65.5%) had values that exceeded the threshold at the last FU. The limp symmetry index concerning hip flexion strength was 63% at 90° and 40% at 30° at the last FU. CONCLUSION: Most patients significantly improved their outcome scores after endoscopic iliopsoas tenotomy, with results remaining consistently stable over time. Despite a significant loss in hip flexion strength, the majority of patients did not report any impairment of their quality of life. STUDY DESIGN: Level III, Retrospective cohort study.

Arthroscopic debridement and reduction is an effective procedure for failed closed reduction in young children with developmental dislocation of the hip.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of arthroscopic debridement and reduction through two medial portals for the treatment of developmental dislocation of the hip (DDH) with failure of initial closed reduction and to explore key pathological structures obstructing reduction. METHODS: Forty-eight children with 58 irreducible dislocated hips treated by arthroscopic reduction between January 2017 and December 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Arthroscopic reduction was performed via two medial portals located in the superior and inferior adductor longus. All intra-articular obstacles were eliminated via arthroscopy, followed by manual reduction and spica cast immobilization. The surgical duration, extent of improvement in the safe zone, and extent of secondary surgical treatment were noted. All the children were followed up for > 24 months. Hip function and radiographic outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: All 58 hips showed safe zone improvement and concentric reduction after arthroscopic debridement. Hypertrophic ligamentum teres and thickened pulvinars were detected and resected in all hips. Constrictive capsules preventing reduction were observed in 15 hips, which needed to be further released. No inverted labrum was observed. Secondary surgery was performed in four hips with redislocation and seven hips with subluxation during follow-up. The remaining 47 hips (81.03%) maintained their reduction at the last follow-up. Excellent and good clinical outcomes were achieved in 95.74% of patients according to McKay's criteria. Two hips, three hips, and one hip were diagnosed with grade I, II, and III osteonecrosis of the femoral head, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that arthroscopic debridement and reduction is a safe and feasible choice for treating irreducible DDH.

Preoperative versus postoperative nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in femoroacetabular impingement patients undergoing hip arthroscopy surgery: analgesic effect, joint function, patients' satisfaction, and quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have analgesic effects on femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) patients undergoing hip arthroscopy surgery (HAS). However, the influence of medication time on the analgesic effect of NSAIDs is uncertain. This study aimed to compare the analgesic effect, joint function, quality of life (QoL), and patients' satisfaction between preoperative and postoperative NSAIDs in these patients. METHODS: In this prospective, observational study, 165 FAI patients undergoing HAS with NSAIDs (celecoxib, meloxicam, and nimesulide) for analgesia were divided into preoperative (PRE-A) and postoperative analgesia (POST-A) groups according to their actual medication. RESULTS: The visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores on the 1st (P < 0.001) and 3rd (D3) (P = 0.015) days after the operation were lower in the PRE-A group versus the POST-A group but not preoperatively (P = 0.262) or on the 7th day after the operation (D7) (P = 0.302). The proportion of patients receiving rescue analgesia decreased in the PRE-A group versus POST-A group (P = 0.041). However, the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), proportion of patients with an mHHS ≥ 70, and EuroQol-5-dimensional score at preoperative, 1st month (M1), and 3rd month (M3) after the operation were similar between the groups (all P > 0.050). The VAS score on D7 was greater in the PRE-A group compared to the POST-A group (P = 0.014), but the scores at M1 and M3 and the satisfaction and very satisfaction rates at D7, M1, and M3 did not differ between the groups (all P > 0.050). Subgroup analysis revealed that the type of NSAID did not affect most outcomes. CONCLUSION: Preoperative NSAIDs elevate analgesic effect and patients' satisfaction, but not joint function or QoL compared to postoperative NSAIDs in FAI patients undergoing HAS.

Postoperative hip bracing reduces kinesiophobia in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy: a randomized-controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Detailed postoperative rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) are still a matter of debate. Adjunctive hip bracing represents a promising tool to improve early patients' mobilization. To present, the effect of hip brace therapy on postoperative functional outcomes and specific patient individual psychologic factors remains controversially discussed. Consequently, we aimed to report postoperative outcomes focusing on hip function, pain and kinesiophobia between braced and unbraced patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized-controlled trial was conducted, including patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS. After exclusion, a final study cohort of 36 patients in the intervention group (postoperative hip brace) and 36 patients in the control group (no hip brace) were compared for kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia), pain (Visual analog scale) and joint function (International Hip Outcome Tool-12) within the first six postoperative months. RESULTS: Hip arthroscopy significantly improved all patient-reported outcomes in both groups. Intergroup analysis revealed significantly lower levels of kinesiophobia in braced patients at 6-months follow up (30.7 vs. 34.1, p = 0.04) while not negatively affecting pain and joint function. No intra- and postoperative complications occurred within both groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study could demonstrate that bracing after hip arthroscopy can positively influence kinesiophobia, while the brace did not negatively impact postoperative pain and quality of life. Thus, hip bracing could be a viable assistive therapy in the postoperative rehabilitation phase after hip arthroscopy.

Injections prior to hip arthroscopy are associated with increased risk of repeat hip arthroscopy at 1 and 5 years.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have shown that intra-articular hip injections prior to hip arthroscopy (HA) can be a helpful diagnostic tool. However, local anesthetic and corticosteroid injections can be chondrotoxic and corticosteroid injections have been shown to increase the risk of infection during subsequent surgical intervention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether preoperative injections adversely affect outcomes of HA using a national database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The TriNetX database was retrospectively queried. Patients undergoing HA for femoroacetabular impingement with at least 1 year of claims runout were included in the analysis. Patients were grouped by whether they had a hip injection within 1 year prior to HA. The rates of repeat HA, total hip arthroplasty (THA), infection, osteonecrosis, and new onset hip OA at 1- and 5-years postoperatively were compared between groups. Statistical significance was assessed at α = 0.05. RESULTS: 6511 HA patients with previous injection and 1178 HA patients without previous injection were included. Patients with a previous injection were overall younger (32.3 vs. 34.7 years, p < 0.001), more likely to be female (69 vs. 48%, p < 0.001) and had a higher BMI (26.3 vs. 25.7 kg/m2, p = 0.043). At 1 and 5-years postoperatively, patients with any injection were 1.43 (p < 0.001) and 1.89 (p < 0.001) times more likely to undergo repeat HA, respectively. At 1 and 5-years postoperatively, patients who underwent a corticosteroid injection were 2.29 (p < 0.001) and 1.89 (p < 0.001) times more likely to undergo repeat HA than patients with local anesthetic injection only and 1.56 (p < 0.001) and 2.08 (p < 0.001) times more likely to undergo repeat HA than patients with no injection. CONCLUSIONS: Intraarticular hip injections prior to hip arthroscopy, particularly corticosteroid injections, are associated with increased risk of repeat hip arthroscopy at 1 and 5 years. Additional studies are needed to elucidate this risk.

Worker's compensation and no-fault insurance are associated with decreased patient reported outcomes and higher rates of revision at 2 and 5 years follow-up compared to patients with commercial insurance undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement.

PURPOSE: To investigate the patient reported outcomes (PROs) of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (HA) for femeroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS), a condition where irregular bone growth in the hip joint leads to friction and pain during movement, who have worker's compensation (WC) or no-fault insurance (NF) versus commercial insurance (CI) at both 2 year and 5 year follow-up. METHODS: This was a single center, single surgeon, retrospective analysis performed between August 2007 and May 2023 of consecutive patients that underwent HA, a minimally invasive surgical procedure used to diagnose and treat problems inside the hip joint through small incisions, for FAIS. Patients were divided into two cohorts-those with WC/NF and those with commercial insurance (CI). Patient reported outcomes (PROs), which included modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), were collected preoperatively, as well as at least 2-year postoperatively. Additionally, other clinically relevant outcomes variables including prevalence of revision surgery and conversion to total hip arthroplasty were recorded. RESULTS: Three hundred and forty three patients met inclusion criteria. There were 32 patients in the WC/NF cohort and 311 patients in the commercial cohort. When controlling for age, sex, and Body Mass Index (BMI), WC/NF status was associated with lower mHHS at both 2 year (ß = - 8.190, p < 0.01, R2 = 0.092) and 5 year follow-up (ß = - 16.60, p < 0.01, R2 = 0.179) and NAHS at 5 year follow up (ß = - 13.462, p = 0.03, R2 = 0.148). The WC/NF cohort had a lower rate of achieving Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB) for mHHS at 2-years follow-up (66.7% vs. 84.1%, p = 0.02).The rate of revision hip arthroscopy was significantly higher in the worker's compensation/no fault cohort than the commercial insurance cohort (15.6% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.01). The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the WC/NF cohort was not significantly different than the rate of conversion to THA in the commercial insurance cohort (0.0% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.30). CONCLUSION: Patients with WC/NF insurance may expect a significant improvement from baseline mHHS and NAHS following HA for FAIS at short-term follow-up. However, this improvement may not be as durable as those experienced by patients with CI. Additionally, WC/NF patients should be counseled that they have a higher risk of undergoing revision hip arthroscopy than similar CI patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Retrospective Comparative Prognostic Investigation.

No difference in prevalence of postoperative iliopsoas tendinitis in patients undergoing arthroscopic hip surgery when using absorbable versus non-absorbable suture for capsular closure.

PURPOSE: The volume of arthroscopic hip surgery has increased dramatically in recent years with iliopsoas tendinitis (IPT) being one of the most common complications of this procedure. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence of post-operative IPT in patients who undergo arthroscopic hip surgery with capsular closure using absorbable versus non-absorbable suture. METHODS: This is a single center, single surgeon, retrospective analysis performed between August 2007 and May 2023 comparing two cohorts who underwent hip arthroscopy. Patients were divided into those who underwent surgery with capsular closure using absorbable (Vicryl®, Johnson and Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ) suture and those who underwent capsular closure with non-absorbable suture (Suturetape, Arthrex, Naples FL). All patients who underwent primary or revision hip arthroscopy and were at least 2 months post-operation were initially included in the study. RESULTS: Between August 2007 and May 2023 a total of 1513 hip arthroscopy surgeries were performed. Within this cohort, 1421 hips underwent hip arthroscopy with non-absorbable suture and 64 hips underwent surgery with absorbable suture. There was no significant difference between the proportion of IPT in the non-absorbable cohort (2.3%) versus the absorbable cohort (1.6%) (P = 0.669). CONCLUSION: Capsular closure with Absorbable sutures was non-inferior to capsular closure with non-absorbable sutures with respect to the proportion of post-operative IPT following hip arthroscopy for FAI. Additionally, the proportion of post-operative IPT was found to be significantly higher in patients undergoing revision versus primary hip arthroscopy, regardless of capsular closure suture type. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Arthroscopic and endoscopic techniques for iliopsoas release in THA are safe and effective: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Hip replacement surgery is highly effective in relieving pain and improving mobility in patients with various hip conditions. However, some patients develop groin pain after surgery, often due to iliopsoas impingement (IPI), which can be challenging to diagnose. Conservative treatments are initially recommended, but when these are not effective, surgical options may be considered. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes, success and failure rates, revision rates, and complications associated with arthroscopic and endoscopic surgery for IPI, thereby providing a comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness and risks of these surgical interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, including a thorough search of five main databases: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane. Eligible articles were meticulously evaluated according to predefined criteria for levels of evidence (LoE), with retrospective studies assessed using the Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS). This systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). RESULTS: Among the 16 included studies, 431 patients with 434 hips underwent either endoscopic or arthroscopic tenotomy. Both techniques showed favorable outcomes, with arthroscopic tenotomy demonstrating slightly higher success rates than endoscopic tenotomy. Common complications included mild pain and occasional infections, with recurrence observed in some cases. Both techniques offer direct visualization of prosthetic components and potential preservation of psoas function. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic and endoscopic iliopsoas tenotomy are effective treatments for alleviating symptoms and improving hip function in patients with IPI post-total hip arthroplasty (THA). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Endoscopic management of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS): a comprehensive systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) presents challenges in clinical management due to its chronic nature and uncertain etiology. Historically attributed to greater trochanteric bursitis, current understanding implicates abductor tendinopathy as the primary cause. Diagnosis usually involves a clinical examination and additional tests such as imaging and provocative testing. Surgical intervention may be considered for cases refractory to conservative therapy, with endoscopic techniques gaining ground over open procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant studies were searched in four databases: Pubmed, Scopus, Embase, and Medline. The selected articles were evaluated according to the criteria of levels of evidence (LoE). The Coleman methodology score (mCMS) was used to analyze the retrospective studies. This systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: Surgical success rates ranged from 70.6-100%, significantly improving pain and function. Complications were generally mild, mainly hematomas and seromas, while recurrence rates were low. However, limitations such as the retrospective design and the absence of control groups warrant cautious interpretation of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic surgery emerges as a promising option for refractory GTPS, offering effective symptom relief and functional improvement. Despite limitations, these results suggest a favorable risk-benefit profile for endoscopic procedures. Further research is needed, particularly prospective randomized trials, to confirm these findings and optimize surgical techniques to improve patient outcomes.

Can we encourage the endoscopic treatment for external snapping hip (ESH)? A systematic review of current concepts.

BACKGROUND: Snapping hip syndrome (SHS) is characterized by snapping sensation and pain and affects up to 10% of the general population. External snapping hip syndrome (ESHS), the most common form, is often due to repetitive movements in sports or anatomical predispositions. Conservative treatment includes physiotherapy and corticosteroid injections, while surgery is considered if conservative measures fail. Open surgical techniques carry several risks, while modern arthroscopic techniques offer less invasive options, such as endoscopic iliotibial band release (ITB) and gluteus maximus tenotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant studies were searched in four databases: Pubmed, Scopus, Embase, and Medline. The selected articles were evaluated according to the criteria of levels of evidence. The Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) was used to analyze the retrospective studies. This paper was registered in the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). RESULTS: Out of 9 included studies, 403 patients with 689 hips underwent endoscopic treatment. ITB release and his variations were the main surgical techniques. Gluteus maximus tenotomy was also used in some studies. Postoperative rehabilitation protocols varied. Patients generally experienced significant improvements in symptoms and functional outcomes, with low rates of recurrence (1.02%) and revision (0.15%). Complications were minimal. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic treatment of ESH shows favorable results, improving functional outcomes and returning patients to pre-injury activity levels. Long-term efficacy and costeffectiveness need to be evaluated, emphasizing the importance of large-scale prospective randomized trials to clarify surgery's benefits in refractory ESH cases.