Hip Arthroscopy for Femoral-Acetabular Impingement: Do Active Claims Affect Outcomes?

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of 3 patient groups undergoing hip arthroscopy. METHODS: This study included 138 consecutive hip arthroscopies (106 analyzed) for femoral-acetabular impingement (FAI) with or without labral tear in patients with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Inclusion criteria included patients older than 18 with clinical or radiologic manifestation of FAI with or without labral tear. Exclusion criteria included previous hip surgery and various hip pathologies. Patients were classified into 3 study groups. Group 1 included work-related injuries with active claims ACs (n = 33); mean age, 32 (range, 19 to 63); group 2 included sports injuries with no ACs (n = 35); mean age, 32 (range, 18 to 69); and group 3 included non-sports-related injuries without pending ACs (NAS; n = 38); mean age, 45 (range, 20 to 68). Outcomes were assessed using modified Harris hip scores (mHHS) and hip outcome scores (HOS) preoperatively and during the final evaluation. RESULTS: Baseline score for all groups did not significantly differ (P = .210 for mHHS, P = .176 for HOS). All groups significantly improved from preoperative to final evaluation (group 1 mHHS P = .42, HOS P = .001; group 2 mHHS P < .001, HOS P < .001; group 3 NAS mHHS P = .001, HOS P = .007). AC patients had the lowest final evaluation scores, while the sports group had the highest. The NAS group did not differ from either group at final evaluation. Preoperative and final evaluation scores inversely correlated with age (r range, -24 to -28; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that patients may benefit from arthroscopic repair of FAI and labral tears regardless of ACs. The level of improvement, however, is not constant across patients with different characteristics. Moreover, it appears that age may impact perceived improvement after hip arthroscopy. Hip arthroscopy as an intervention in patients with ACs provided positive outcomes, corroborating that an AC is not a contraindication for this procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level III, retrospective comparative study.