Search

Purpose To compare the accuracy of conventional fluoroscopy versus an intraoperative radiographic visualization tool in assisting a novice and experienced hip arthroscopist in comprehensive cam correction to a desired alpha angle (AA). Methods A cadaveric study was performed using 28 hemi-pelvises with cam-type deformity (AA > 55˚) measured on anteroposterior, lateral, and Dunn-view radiographs. Two fellowship-trained hip arthroscopists each performed 14 arthroscopic femoroplasties. The specimens were randomly assigned: 14 of the procedures were performed by the experienced surgeon, with 7 using the automated radiographic visualization tool (Guided Femoroplasty) and 7 using routine fluoroscopy (Control). The same number of hips was assigned to the novice surgeon, completing 7 femoroplasties with and without the visualization tool. Each hip was imaged before and after femoroplasty in 6 different positions using intraoperative fluoroscopy to evaluate head-neck offset. Femoroplasty AAs were compared between groups with and without visualization tool use, as well as between surgeons. One-way analysis of variance analysis was performed to evaluate the consistency of cam resection. Results For the experienced hip arthroscopist, comparison of Guide Femoroplasty and Control groups resulted in similar accuracy when compared to the controls, with post-femoroplasty AA averages ranging from 41.4° ± 3.8˚ to 44.8° ± 2.8˚ (P = .511) and 40.2° ± 5.3˚ to 45.6° ± 2.2˚ (P = .225), respectively. For the novice hip arthroscopist, the Guided Femoroplasty group had higher accuracy, with post-femoroplasty AA averages ranging from 42.8° ± 2.6˚ to 46.1° ± 7.2˚(P = .689) with and 39.8° ± 3.1˚ to 51.9° ± 8.1˚ (P = .001) without the visualization tool. Comparison of procedure time did not show any statistically significant difference between the use of the radiographic visualization tool and controls for either surgeon (P > .05 for all). Conclusions Femoroplasty with and without the use of automated radiographic visualization tool results in accurate cam resection when used by both the experienced and novice surgeon. However, higher accuracy was observed when resecting to a desired AA performed by a novice surgeon using the visualization tool. Additionally, use of the visualization tool did not result in longer procedure times for either surgeon. Clinical Relevance The impact of incomplete cam resections and over-resection on patient outcomes in the literature has led to the recent development of automated intraoperative radiographic visualization tools that allow for assistance of cam resection accuracy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. This cadaveric study demonstrates that femoroplasty with the use of an intraoperative automated radiographic visualization tool may result in more accurate cam resections.

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

To (1) compare the rates of reaching threshold hip-specific outcome scores for achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) in patients who underwent partial versus complete T-capsulotomy repair and (2) identify the failure rates in each group 5 years after undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).Data from consecutive patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS performed by a single fellowship-trained surgeon from January 2011 to March 2013 were collected and analyzed. Baseline data, hip-specific outcomes, and clinical failure rates were recorded at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. Patients with partial T-capsulotomy repair were matched 1:3 by age, body mass index, and sex to patients with complete T-capsulotomy repair. Threshold scores for achieving the MCID and PASS were calculated and compared between the 2 groups. Additionally, rates of revision and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) were compared between the groups.A total of 379 patients were available for analysis (39 partial and 340 complete repairs), with 100 patients included in the matching process (25 in the partial-repair group and 75 in the complete-repair group). Comparison of radiographic parameters, including the Tönnis grade, alpha angle, and lateral center-edge angle, between the 2 groups showed no statistically significant difference (P.05 for all). Comparison of postoperative score averages between the partial- and complete-closure groups showed a significant difference in the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living Subscale (85.4 ± 17.7 vs 94.6 ± 7.8, P.001), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (76.6 ± 26.2 vs 89.3 ± 16.8, P = .034), modified Harris Hip Score (83.2 ± 19.7 vs 90.5 ± 11.2, P = .035), and visual analog scale pain score (24.5 ± 30.8 vs 13.4 ± 15.8, P = .035). A total of 65 complete-repair patients (95.6%) achieved the MCID for at least 1 outcome measure versus 18 patients with partial repair (78.3%) (P = .04). A total of 69 complete-repair patients (92%) achieved the PASS for at least 1 outcome measure versus 18 partial-repair patients (72%) (P = .017). Of the 39 partial-repair patients, 35.9% (n = 14) underwent revision or conversion to THA, as compared with 2.9% (n = 10) in the overall cohort.At a minimum 5-year follow-up, patients with complete capsular closure after hip arthroscopy for FAIS show superior long-term outcomes and achieve higher rates of meaningful clinical success when compared with patients with partial capsular closure. Furthermore, patients with partial capsular repair undergo revision or conversion to THA at high rates.Level III, retrospective comparative study.

To (1) compare the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and citation rates between orthopaedic and nonorthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 5 high-impact medical journals and (2) identify general characteristics of these articles associated with greater exposure on social media platforms.Articles published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Annals of Internal Medicine, and Archives of Internal Medicine between January 2011 and December 2016 were analyzed. These journals were selected based on retaining high impact factors with rigorous publication standards and availability of the AAS for their publications. The queried time frame was chosen to balance the inception of the AAS with an optimal period for citation accrual. A total of 14 article characteristics, in addition to number of Tweets, Facebook shares, news mentions, and the AAS, were extracted. Inclusion criteria were orthopaedic RCTs reporting on outcomes after surgical intervention. Linear regression was used to assess the relationship between publication characteristics and the AAS and social media attention.A total of 9 orthopaedic and 59 nonorthopaedic RCTs were included. The mean AASs were significantly different (574 ± 565.7 versus 256.9 ± 222.3, P = .003), whereas citation rate was not (192.2 ± 117.1 versus 382.3 ± 560.3, P = .317). Orthopaedic RCTs had a significantly greater number of mentions on Twitter and Facebook (P.001). A higher AAS significantly associated with a greater number of citations (β = 0.75, P = .019) for orthopaedic RCTs. The mean AAS of orthopaedic RCTs favoring nonoperative management (809.6 ± 676.3) was greater than those favoring operative treatment (292.0 ± 248.9) but was not statistically significant (P = .361).Orthopaedic RCTs published in 5 high-impact general medical journals had a significantly greater mean AAS relative to nonorthopaedic RCTs, with no differences in citation rates. Additionally, there was a strong association between the AAS and citation rate of orthopaedic RCTs. Orthopaedic RCTs had greater social media exposure on both Twitter and Facebook.Orthopaedic surgeons, researchers, and providers who publish RCTs in high-impact medical journals can anticipate extensive social media attention for their articles relative to other nonorthopaedic RCTs in the same journals. Social media attention may be related to operative versus nonoperative management topics. This study provides further evidence for the increasing use of the AAS and its association with citation accrual.

To present the results of a mid-term follow-up study on sleep quality at a minimum of 2 years after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.Original inclusion criteria were consecutive patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for cam/pincer correction between March 1, 2017, and July 1, 2017, who did not respond to nonoperative management, whereas exclusion criteria were revision arthroscopy, gluteus medius repair, contralateral procedure during the follow-up period, and known sleep disorders. Patients who had followed up at 6 months were contacted at a minimum of 2 years following their surgery. In total, 37 of 55 (67.3%) were available for follow-up. New Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scores were obtained and compared with previously reported scores at preoperative and 6-month time points. The PSQI ranges from 0 to 21, with a score of ≥5 indicating poor sleep quality. Point biserial correlations and χPreoperatively, 94.5% of patients (52/55) had a PSQI of ≥5 with a mean PSQI score of 9.8 ± 4.2. Statistically significant improvements were observed at both 6 (PSQI: 2.2 ± 0.2, P.001) and 24 months (PSQI: 4.3 ± 3.9) postoperatively compared to baseline (P.001, both). The mean PSQIs at 2 years and 6 months postoperatively were not statistically different (P = .06). A total of 21.7% (10/46) of patients continued to experience poor sleep quality at 6 months postoperatively, whereas a total of 29.7% (11/37) did so at 2 years postoperatively (P = .36). No preoperative factors were associated with poor sleep quality (P.05 all).The early improvements in sleep quality observed 6 months postoperatively from an original small cohort were maintained at a mean 2.8-year follow-up in those who responded. However, approximately 30% of hip arthroscopy patients still experience poor sleep quality.IV, therapeutic case series.

Purpose To to assess whether there are any significant differences in hip joint space width (JSW) between weight-bearing versus supine pelvic radiographs. Methods Standing and supine anteroposterior pelvic radiographs of 86 patients (146 hips) were included. Sample size was sufficiently powered to assess for equivalence between standing and supine films for JSW measurements made at the medial, lateral, and central aspects of the sourcil line. Measurements were made by 2 independent reviewers blinded to patient positioning. Each reviewer repeated a subset of the measurements to assess intra-rater reproducibility. Mean differences in joint space measurements between standing and supine radiographs were reported for each point of the sourcil. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for inter and intra-rater reliability were also calculated. Results There were no significant differences between JSW measurements made on standing and supine pelvic radiographs (P = .468). Furthermore, equivalence testing demonstrated statistical equivalence between standing and supine JSW measurements made based on an equivalence threshold of ±0.5 mm. Inter-rater reliability demonstrated good agreement with an overall ICC of 0.775 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.734-0.809). Intra-rater reliability also demonstrated good agreement with ICCs of 0.84 (95% CI 0.758-0.889) and 0.798 (95% CI 0.721-0.851) for the 2 reviewers, respectively. Conclusions JSW measurements on standing and supine pelvic radiographs were not significantly different, and their inter-rater agreement and intra-rater reproducibility demonstrated good reliability and repeatability. Therefore, either may be used to assess JSW, including measurements that may impact treatment decisions for hip arthroscopy. Level of Evidence Level III; retrospective comparative study

(1) To compare the acetabular coverage between dysplasia, borderline dysplasia, and control acetabulum in a quantitative 3-dimensional manner; and (2) to evaluate correlations between the radiologic parameters and the 3-dimensional zonal-acetabular coverage.We reviewed contralateral hip computed tomography images of patients 16 to 60 years of age who underwent 1 of 3 types of surgeries: eccentric rotational acetabular osteotomy, curved intertrochanteric varus osteotomy, and total hip replacement with minimum 1-year follow-up from January 2013 to April 2018. A point-cloud model of the acetabulum created from computed tomography was divided into 6 zones. Three-dimensional acetabular coverage was measured radially at intervals of 1°. Mean radial acetabular coverage for each zone was named ZAC (zonal acetabular coverage) and was compared among the 3 subgroups (control: 25° ≤lateral center-edge angle [LCEA]40°; borderline: 20° ≤LCEA25°; and dysplasia: LCEA ≤20°) statistically. Further, the correlations between the ZAC in each zone and the LCEA were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient.One-hundred fifteen hips were categorized as control (36 hips), borderline (32 hips), and dysplasia (47 hips). The mean anterocranial ZAC in the borderline (87.5 ± 5.7°) was smaller than that in the control (92.6 ± 5.9°, P = .005) but did not differ compared with the dysplasia (84.5 ± 7.6°, P = .131). In contrast, the anterocaudal (71.2 ± 5.0°), posterocranial (85.0 ± 6.4°), and posterocaudal (82.4 ± 4.5°) mean ZACs in the borderline were not different from those in the control (anterocaudal, 74.3 ± 4.6°, P = .090; posterocranial, 87.9 ± 4.3°, P = .082; posterocaudal, 85.1 ± 5.0°, P = .069) respectively. Although there was a very strong positive correlation with supra-anterior ZAC and LCEA (r = 0.750, P.001), the correlation between the anterocranial ZAC and LCEA was relatively weak (r = 0.574, P.001).The anterosuperior acetabular coverage in the borderline dysplastic acetabulum is more similar to the dysplastic acetabulum than to the normal acetabulum.This study emphasizes the importance of evaluating not only the lateral but also the anterior coverage in borderline dysplasia.

To compare patient functional scores and rates of achieving minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) between patients with a hypotrophic labrum with those with a normal labrum width at a minimum 1-year follow-up from arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.Data from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between November 2015 and July 2018 for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome were analyzed. Baseline demographic data, preoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and minimum 1-year PROMs, including Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score, international Hip Outcome Tool 12 questions, and visual analog scale for pain and satisfaction were recorded. The labrum size was determined using an arthroscopic probe at the 12- to 2-o'clock position with a hypotrophic labrum being defined as4 mm and normal labrum defined as having a width between 4 and 7 mm on the articular side. Patients with hypotrophic labrum were matched 1:1 by age and body mass index to patients with normal labrum width.A total of 346 patients were included in the study with an average age of 31.4 ± 11.9 and a majority being female (72.0%). There were 173 in each of the normal and hypotrophic groups. There were no significant differences seen in 1-year PROMs between the 2 groups (P.05 for all). The normal labrum group achieved MCID at a rate of 75% to 84% and PASS at a rate of 51% to 70%. The hypotrophic labrum group achieved MCID at a rate of 70% to 85% and PASS at a rate of 57% to 71%. There were no significant differences in rates between each group (P.05 for all).Patients with an intraoperative finding of labral hypotrophy achieve 1-year meaningful clinical outcome at the same rate as those with normal labral width following arthroscopic labral repair.III, Case-control study.

To compare the biomechanical properties of the hip joint with an intact femoral cam lesion, partial cam resection, and complete cam resection.A cadaveric study was performed using 8 hemipelvises with cam-type morphology (alpha angle55°) and intact labra. Intra-articular pressure maps were produced for each specimen under the following conditions: (1) native cam morphology (intact), (2) cam morphology with incomplete resection (partial), and (3) cam morphology with complete resection (complete). By use of an open technique, resection of the superior portion of the cam morphology was performed with a 5.5-mm burr to create the partial resection, followed by the inferior portion to create the complete resection. In each condition, 3 biomechanical parameters were obtained: contact pressure, contact area, and peak force within a region of interest. Measurements were performed 3 times in each condition, and the average value was used for statistical analysis. Analysis of variance was used to compare biomechanical parameters between conditions.A statistically significant difference was found between the pre- and post-resection alpha angles (62.2° ± 3.9° vs 40.9° ± 1.4°, P.001). Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed that the normalized average pressure values of hips with complete resection of cam lesions were significantly lower than those of hips with incomplete femoral cam lesions and hips with intact cam morphology (100% vs 93.6% ± 8.3% and 82.6% ± 16.2%, respectively; P.0001). The percentage reduction of contact pressure in the complete and partial groups was 17.4% and 6.4%, respectively, compared with the intact group. Contact area and peak force showed no statistically significant differences across the 3 conditions (P.05).Complete cam resection results in significantly lower intra-articular hip contact pressures than incomplete cam resection and native cam morphology in a cadaveric hip model. These observations underscore the importance of ensuring complete resection of femoral cam lesions in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.Previous studies have shown that the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome is incomplete femoral cam resection during the index operation. This study shows biomechanical differences associated with partial cam resection compared with the complete cam resection state that may translate to persistent symptoms.

Purpose To define unique substantial clinical benefit (SCB) values for improvement on the 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) based on a preoperative self-rating of function in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for intra-articular pathology. Methods This was a retrospective review of prospective collected data on patients having hip arthroscopy for labral and chondral pathology and femoroacetabular impingement. On preoperative assessment and 1-year (+/–1 month) follow-up, subjects completed the iHOT-12 and a self-categorical rating of function (“severely abnormal,” “abnormal,” “nearly normal,” or “normal”). Separate receiver operator characteristic analyses were performed for each preoperative categorical self-rating of function to determine unique SCB values for improvement-based changes in self-rating of function. Results Of 1034 eligible patients, 733 (71%) subjects met the inclusion criteria. Subjects consisted of 537 (73%) female and 196 (27%) male subjects with a mean age of 35.3 years (standard deviation 13). At a mean of 352 (standard deviation 21) days postsurgery, changes in iHOT-12 scores of 22, 28, and 27 points were associated with acceptable accuracy in identifying those who had an improved function rating when reporting a “severely abnormal,” abnormal,” and “nearly normal” rating on preoperative assessment, respectively. The accuracy of these SCB values in predicting improvement was different depending on the patient’s preoperative rating of function. The accuracy of the SCB values in predicting improvement in those who had a “nearly normal” rating of function was not as accurate (area under the curve = 0.73) compared with those who had a “severely abnormal” or “abnormal” rating of function on preoperative assessment (area under the curve = 0.89; 0.89). Conclusions This study provides surgeons with unique SCB values for the iHOT-12 based on a preoperative rating function and may allow for a more precise interpretation of score changes. SCB values of 22, 28, and 27 points on the iHOT-12 at 1-year (+/–1 month) follow-up identified those who had an improved function rating, when reporting a “severely abnormal,” abnormal,” and “nearly normal” rating on preoperative assessment, respectively. Level of Evidence III, retrospective comparative study

To determine clinical outcomes of patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy for failure to improve with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and intraoperative evidence of a capsular incompetency as compared with (1) patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy without evidence of a capsular incompetency and (2) patients undergoing primary surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) at a minimum follow up of 2 years.Data from consecutive patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy with MRI/arthrogram-confirmed capsular incompetency between January 2012 and June 2016 were analyzed. All revision patients with capsular incompetency was matched 1:1 by age and body mass index to FAIS revision patients without capsular incompetency and primary FAIS patients. Outcomes included the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living (ADL), HOS-Sports Subscale (SS), Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), pain, and satisfaction. The minimal clinically important difference was calculated for HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, and mHHS.In total, 49 patients (54.4%) of 90 undergoing revision hip arthroscopy had MRI evidence of a capsular incompetency. Most patients were female (79.6%), with a mean age of 30 ± 10.5 years and body mass index of 25.7 ± 5.5. The difference among pre- and postoperative HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, mHHS, and visual analog scale score for pain were all statistically significant (P.05). Analysis of reported outcomes among matched groups demonstrated statistically significant differences, with the group undergoing primary surgery having the greatest 2-year outcomes. Only 66.7% of patients undergoing revision surgery with capsular incompetency achieved a minimal clinically important difference; however, there was no significant difference when compared with revision patients without capsular incompetency. When compared with patients undergoing primary surgery, the difference in frequency was statistically significant (66.7% vs 91.3%; P.001).More than one half of patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy had MRI and intraoperative evidence of capsular incompetency. Revision arthroscopy for capsular incompetency results in significantly improved 2-year outcomes. However, patients undergoing revision for capsular incompetency and intact capsule revision patients reported significantly lower outcomes compared with primary patients.Level III, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Purpose To determine the rate of and risk factors for 30-day unplanned admissions following hip arthroscopy in a U.S. population. Methods Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database using validated Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision codes. Patient demographics, comorbidities, preoperative laboratory values, surgical details, and postoperative outcomes were compared between patients with unplanned admissions and those without. Univariate analysis comparing study cohorts was performed using 2-tailed Student t tests with Levene's test for equality of variance or χ2/Fisher exact tests as appropriate. Using variables that were significant in the univariate analysis, we created Cox proportional hazard models to identify independent predictors for unplanned admission. Results A total of 1931 cases of hip arthroscopy were identified. There were 18 cases of unplanned admissions within 30 days of index procedure (0.9%). The median time to unplanned admission was 14.5 days (interquartile range: 3.875-25.125 days). The most common reasons for admission were surgical-site infection (11.1%), wound complications (11.1%), and thromboembolic events (11.1%). There were 4 patients who required reoperation (22.2%). There were 7 cases (39.0%) that were readmitted for reasons unrelated to the index hip arthroscopy procedure. Multivariate analysis identified increasing body mass index, chronic corticosteroid use, and perioperative blood transfusion as factors independently associated with increased risk for unplanned admission. Conclusions There exists a low incidence of 30-day unplanned admission, predominantly secondary to surgical-site infections, wound complications, and thromboembolic events. Independent risk factors for unplanned admission include greater body mass index, chronic corticosteroid use, and perioperative transfusions. Level of Evidence Level III Retrospective Cohort Study.

The purpose of this study was to establish an international expert consensus on operating room findings that aid in the diagnosis of hip instability.An expert panel was convened to build an international consensus on the operating room diagnosis/confirmation of hip instability. Seventeen surgeons who have published or lectured nationally or internationally on the topic of hip instability were invited to participate. Fifteen panel members completed a pre-meeting questionnaire and agreed to participate in a 1-day consensus meeting on May 15, 2021. A review of the literature was performed to identify published intraoperative reference criteria used in the diagnosis of hip instability. Studies were included for discussion if they reported and intraoperative findings associated with hip instability. The evidence for and against each criteria was discussed, followed by an anonymous voting process. For consensus, defined a priori, items were included in the final criteria set if at least 80% of experts agreed.A review of the published literature identified 11 operating room criteria that have been used to facilitate the diagnosis of hip instability. Six additional criteria were proposed by panel members as part of the pre-meeting questionnaire. Consensus agreement was achieved for 8 criteria, namely ease of hip distraction under anesthesia (100.0% agreement), inside-out pattern of chondral damage (100.0% agreement), location of chondral damage on the acetabulum (93.3% agreement), pattern of labral damage (93.3% agreement), anteroinferior labrum chondral damage (86.7% agreement), perifoveal cartilage damage (97.6% agreement), a capsular defect (86.7% agreement), and capsular status (80.0% agreement). Consensus was not achieved for 9 items, namely ligamentum teres tear (66.7% agreement), arthroscopic stability tests (46.7% agreement), persistent distraction after removal of traction (46.7% agreement), findings of examination under anesthesia (46.7% agreement), the femoral head divot sign (40.0% agreement), inferomedial synovitis (26.7% agreement), drive-through sign (26.7% agreement), iliopsoas irritation (26.7% agreement) and ligamentum teres-labral kissing lesion (13.3% agreement). All experts agreed on the final list of 8 criteria items reaching consensus.This expert panel identified 8 criteria that can be used in the operating room to help confirm the diagnosis of hip instability.Level V expert opinion.

To report comparative hip arthroscopic outcomes of patients with low (borderline dysplasia), normal, and high (global pincer femoroacetabular impingement [FAI]) lateral acetabular coverage.A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a multicenter registry was performed. Primary hip arthroscopy patients were assigned to 1 of 3 groups based on preoperative lateral center-edge angle: borderline dysplasia (≤25°), normal (25.1°-38.9°), and pincer (≥39°). Repeated-measures analysis of variance compared preoperative with 2-year minimum postoperative International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) scores. Subsequent analysis of variance determined the effect of acetabular coverage on magnitude of change in scores.Of 437 patients, the only statistical difference between groups was a lower prevalence of acetabuloplasty in the borderline dysplasia group (P = .001). A significant improvement in the preoperative to postoperative iHOT-12 scores for patients with normal acetabular coverage, acetabular undercoverage, and acetabular overcoverage was observed: F(1, 339) = 311.06; P.001, with no statistical differences in preoperative (P = .505) and postoperative (P.488) iHOT-12 scores when comparing the groups based on acetabular coverage. Mean iHOT-12 scores increased from 37.3 preoperatively to 68.7 postoperatively (P.001) in the borderline dysplasia group, from 34.4 to 72 (P.001) in the normal coverage group, and from 35.3 to 69.4 (P.001) in the pincer group. These preoperative scores increased by 31.4, 37.8, and 34.1, respectively, with no effect for acetabular coverage on the magnitude of change from preoperative to postoperative iHOT-12 scores: F(2,339) = 1.18; P = .310. Ten patients (2.3%) underwent conversion arthroplasty, and 19 patients (4.4%) underwent revision arthroscopy with no significant effect of acetabular coverage on the incidence of revision or conversion surgery: χLateral acetabular coverage did not influence outcomes from primary hip arthroscopy when performed in patients with low (borderline dysplasia), normal, and high (global pincer FAI) lateral center-edge angle. Borderline dysplasia and moderate global pincer FAI with no or minimal osteoarthritis do not compromise successful 2-year minimum outcomes or survivorship following primary hip arthroscopy when performed by experienced surgeons.Level III, retrospective therapeutic trial.

Purpose The primary purpose of this investigation was to systematically evaluate the literature for the current indications and outcomes of arthroscopic labral reconstruction of the hip. Our secondary purpose was to evaluate the role of arthroscopic labral reconstruction in the management of reparable labral tears. Methods A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using a PRISMA checklist. Studies published between June 2009 and June 2018 that evaluated outcomes after arthroscopic labral reconstruction with a minimum of 1 year of follow-up were included. Results Eleven studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 373 patients were identified. Of the 11 studies, 9 reported that an irreparable labrum was their indication for reconstruction, with 8 reporting that this was ultimately determined intraoperatively. Substantial variability in surgical technique, graft choice, and concurrent pathology was found. All 11 studies used at least 1 validated functional outcome metric to evaluate surgical outcomes, with all studies reporting improvement greater than the minimal clinically important difference. Donor-site pain was the most common complication, although it was reported in only 2 studies. Reported rates of revision surgery and conversion to arthroplasty were low (range, 0%-9.1% for both). Conclusions All 11 studies included in this systematic review reported clinically significant functional improvements after arthroscopic labral reconstruction and low rates of complications, revision surgery, and progression of arthritis, although graft types and concomitant procedures confound the results. The most common indication for reconstruction was a deficient labrum on intraoperative evaluation. The 6 studies that evaluated patient satisfaction reported favorable results, with a range of 6.73 to 8.7. Level of Evidence Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

To evaluate postoperative coronal/sagittal spinal plane and spinopelvic parameters in patients undergoing gluteus medius repair and to identify associations between outcomes and the aforementioned spinopelvic variables.Patients who underwent gluteus medius/minimus repair by a single surgeon between January 20, 2012, and November 25, 2015, were retrospectively identified from a prospectively collected database. Radiographic measurements included Cobb angle, lumbar lordosis, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt, sacral slope, and pelvic incidence. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were obtained at baseline and a minimum of 22 months after surgery. Bivariate correlation determined effects of spinopelvic measurements on PROs. Scoliosis and nonscoliosis groups were compared using independent samples t-test, and multivariate analysis determined whether the preoperative variables affected outcomes.Thirty-eight (80.9%) of 47 consecutive patients were radiographically evaluated with a scoliosis series. All patients demonstrated significant improvements in all PROs and pain (P.001 for all), as well as at an average 28.2 ± 7.8 (range, 22-51) months after surgery. There were significant negative relationships between SVA and Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (r = -0.405, P = .026) and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (r = -0.492, P = .011) scores. Patients with a positive SVA (0 cm) had significantly worse patient-reported outcomes than their counterparts with negative (≤0 cm) SVA. Also, patients with positive sagittal plane deformity (SVA5 cm) had significantly worse HOS-SS than patients without positive sagittal plane deformity (SVA5 cm) (47.0 ± 35.3, 73.2 ± 24.0; P = .04). Independent sample t-testing for the patients with scoliosis (n = 18) versus no scoliosis (n = 20) demonstrates a significantly worse postoperative International Hip Outcome Tool (short version) score in the patients with scoliosis (77.4 ± 15.1, 53.8 ± 37.1; P = .043).Patients with scoliosis presented with lower rates of symptom improvement and ability to return to an active lifestyle in patients with hip disorders. In addition, patients with positive sagittal plane deformity experienced lower hip-related sport-specific outcome scores. Although the direct relationship between the spine and the hip in patients after gluteus medius/minimus repair remains unclear, this study shows an association between these postoperative outcomes and spinopelvic parameters.Level IV, case series.

Purpose To describe the prevalence of abnormal sleep quality in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and to determine whether arthroscopic hip preservation surgery with cam/pincer correction, labral preservation, and capsular plication can improve sleep quality postoperatively. Methods All patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for cam/pincer correction who failed nonoperative management between March 1, 2017, and July 1, 2017, were administered a validated sleep quality questionnaire—the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)—preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively. Exclusion criteria included patients undergoing revision arthroscopy, gluteus medius repair, or a contralateral procedure during the follow-up period and those with known sleep disorders. A global (total) PSQI score >5 indicates poor sleep quality. The Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score, and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 were used to assess functional outcomes. A repeated measures analysis of variance with post hoc Greenhouse-Geisser and Bonferroni corrections was conducted to determine statistically significant changes in sleep patterns. Results A total of 52 patients (94.6%) were included in the final analysis. The mean (± standard error) patient age was 37.8 ± 1.9 years, and body mass index was 27.6 ± 0.7. Preoperatively, 49 (94.2%) of patients experienced poor sleep quality, defined as a global PSQI score >5, with a mean PSQI score of 9.8 ± 0.6. At 24 weeks postoperatively, 10 (21.7%) of patients experienced poor sleep quality with a mean PSQI score of 2.2 ± 0.2. All patients had significant improvements in all hip outcome instruments at 24 weeks postoperatively (P Conclusions Preoperatively, patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome have a high prevalence of sleep disturbance. These patients experience subsequent improvement in sleep disturbance after arthroscopic hip surgery early in the postoperative period. Level of Evidence Level IV, case series.

To compare intracapsular volume reduction between interportal capsular shift and T-capsulotomy plication in a cadaveric model.Twelve pair-matched specimens were randomized into T-capsulotomy plication or interportal capsular shift. T-capsulotomy was performed using a 2-cm interportal and 2-cm bisecting, longitudinal limb to the intertrochanteric line. Plication was performed utilizing 5-mm bites on either side of the capsulotomy with arthroscopic knot tying technique standard alternating half hitches. Pair-matched interportal capsular shift specimens underwent 5-cm interportal capsulotomy, and capsular shift was performed utilizing 5 nonabsorbable sutures placed in 45° orientation at 5 mm from the capsulotomy margin. With each specimen in a position of slight flexion and adduction, a spinal needle was used to inject methylene blue-colored saline solution intra-articularly; the volcano method was used to measure capsular volume before and after each respective plication technique. Mean absolute volumes and relative volumetric reduction for each technique were quantified and compared to determine statistical significance.At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences in capsular volume between pair-matched specimens (T-capsulotomy plication, 42.5 ± 5.1 mL; interportal capsular shift, 45.0 ± 88.6 mL; P = .555). After capsulotomy and secondary plication, both the T-capsulotomy (post: mean = 32.5 ± 8.0 mL; P.001) and interportal capsulotomy groups (post: mean = 29.4 ± 10.0; P .0001) demonstrated significant decreases in capsular volume, with average reductions of 10.0 ± 3.3 mL and 15.6 ± 3.2 mL, respectively. Although the interportal capsular shift (35.9% ± 11.3%) demonstrated greater volumetric reduction relative to baseline when compared with the T-capsular plication (24.5% ± 10.8%), these results were not significant (P = .104).Both T-capsular plication and interportal capsular shift produce statistically significant reductions in overall hip capsular volume. Although the interportal capsular shift may generate modestly higher degrees of capsular reduction, the comparative biomechanical repercussions of each technique are not currently known.Irrespective of arthroscopic technique, capsular plication with 5-mm bites decreases capsular volume by approximately one-third to one-fourth that of baseline measures.

Purpose To define minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) values for the 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for intra-articular pathology. Methods This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data on patients who underwent hip arthroscopy. On initial assessment and follow-up between 335 and 395 days after surgery, subjects completed the iHOT-12 and a categorical self-rating of function (severely abnormal, abnormal, nearly normal, or normal). One-half the standard deviation (SD) of the change in 1-year iHOT-12 scores was used to calculate the MCID. Receiver operator characteristic analysis was performed to determine SCB values. A change in SCB value was determined based on an improvement in the categorical rating of function. Absolute postoperative SCB scores were calculated to determine scores that would be associated with normal function ratings or with abnormal or severely abnormal function ratings. Results Of 1,034 eligible patients, 733 (71%) met the inclusion criteria. The subjects consisted of 537 female patients (73%) and 196 male patients (27%), with a mean age of 35.3 years (SD, 13 years). At a mean of 352 days (SD, 21 days) after surgery, 536 patients (73%) were in the “improved” group and 197 (27%) were in the “not improved” group. The MCID was 13 points. An SCB change score of 28 points was able to identify patients who improved with high sensitivity (0.79) and specificity (0.72). Scores of 86 points or greater and 56 points or less were the cutoff values found to identify subjects who rated their function as normal and abnormal, respectively, with high sensitivity (0.74 and 0.90, respectively) and specificity (0.82 and 0.86, respectively). Conclusions This study provides information to help interpret iHOT-12 scores for a follow-up period ranging between 335 and 395 days with MCID and SCB values of 13 and 28 points, respectively. In addition, a vpatient who scored 86 points or better was likely to have a normal rating of function, whereas a patient with a score of 56 points or less was likely to have an abnormal rating of function. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Purpose To define the anatomy of the pudendal nerve in relationship to the proximal hamstring and other nearby neurological structures during proximal hamstring repair. Methods Six fresh-frozen human cadaveric hemi-pelvises from male patients ages 64.0 ± 4.1 years were dissected in prone position with hips in 10° flexion to identify the relationship of proximal hamstring origin to surrounding neurologic structures including the pudendal nerve, sciatic nerve, and posterior femoral cutaneous nerve. Two independent observers used digital calipers to measure distances. Results The pudendal nerve emerged at the inferior border of the piriformis muscle 6.3 ± 1.4 cm from the superior aspect of the proximal hamstring origin. It passed the superior border of the sacrotuberous ligament 3.0 ± 0.6 cm from the superior aspect and 3.9 ± 0.7 cm from the medial aspect of the hamstring origin. It crossed the inferior border of the sacrotuberous ligament 3.0 ± 0.4 cm from the superior aspect and 2.7 ± 0.7 cm from the medial aspect of the proximal hamstring origin. The shortest distance from the hamstring origin to the pudendal nerve was 2.6 ± 0.5 cm from the superior aspect and 2.3 ± 0.8 cm from the medial aspect. The shortest distance from the hamstring origin to the pudendal nerve was located deep to the sacrotuberous ligament in all cadavers. The sciatic nerve was an average of 1.1 ± 0.1 cm lateral to the lateral aspect of the proximal hamstring origin. The posterior femoral cutaneous nerve was located between the hamstring origin and the sciatic nerve, 0.7 ± 0.2 cm lateral to the lateral aspect of the proximal hamstring origin. Conclusions The proximal hamstring origin lies in close proximity to surrounding nerves, including the pudendal, sciatic, and posterior femoral cutaneous nerves. Clinical Relevance Knowledge that the pudendal nerve lies 2 to 3 cm superior and medial to the proximal hamstring origin may help to prevent iatrogenic damage during surgical dissection and retraction when performing proximal hamstring repair or deep gluteal space endoscopy.

Purpose To evaluate the effect of platelet-rich fibrin matrix (PRFM) on outcomes after surgical repair of gluteus medius tendons. Methods This is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data comparing patients who underwent gluteus medius repair with PRFM and patients without PRFM. Preoperative characteristics, intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes at a minimum of 1 year were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using a multivariate analysis of variance to test for differences in continuous demographic variables and postoperative-only scores between patient groups, χ 2 tests were performed for categorical variables, and a repeated-measures analysis of variance was performed to test for the effects of PRFM. We also assessed for interobserver variation in grading adductor tendon tears. Results In total, the series of gluteus medius repairs without PRFM included 29 patients (25 women and 4 men, 15 right and 4 left) with a mean age of 63.09 ± 12.0 years. The series of gluteus medius repairs with PRFM included 18 patients (16 women and 2 men, 6 right and 12 left) with a mean age of 60.26 ± 8.8 years. There were no differences in patient preoperative variables or intraoperative characteristics. Although there was a significant effect of surgical intervention on the visual analog scale for pain, Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific, and modified Harris Hip Score, the use of PRFM had no significant effect on outcome. Linear models showed a significant positive effect of PRFM on only postoperative Short Form 12 Physical and International Hip Outcome Tool 12 scores. Conclusions PRFM augmentation does not appear to have an effect on gluteus medius tendon repair in terms of pain or clinical evidence of retears but may have a role in improving subjective outcomes of overall and hip-specific physical functioning. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative study.

To report observational findings of patients with acetabular dysplasia undergoing hip arthroscopy.We performed a comparative case series of multicenter registry patients from January 2014 to April 2016 meeting the inclusion criteria of isolated hip arthroscopy, a documented lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), and completion of preoperative patient-reported outcome measures. A retrospective analysis compared range of motion, intra-articular pathology, and procedures of patients with dysplasia (LCEA ≤25°) and patients without dysplasia (LCEA25°).Of 1,053 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 133 (13%) had dysplasia with a mean LCEA of 22.8° (standard deviation, 2.4°) versus 34.6° (standard deviation, 6.3°) for non-dysplasia patients. There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative modified Harris Hip Score, International Hip Outcome Tool-12 score, or visual analog scale score (pain). Cam deformity occurred in 80% of dysplasia patients. There was a significant difference in internal rotation between the dysplasia (21°) and non-dysplasia groups (16°, P.001). Mean internal rotation (33.5°; standard deviation, 15.6°) of the dysplastic subjects without cam morphology was greater than that of the dysplastic patients with cam morphology (18.5°; standard deviation, 11.6°; P.001). Hypertrophic labra were found more commonly in dysplastic (33%) than non-dysplastic hips (11%, P.001). Labral tears in patients with dysplasia were treated by repair (76%), reconstruction (13%), and selective debridement (11%); labral treatments were not significantly different between cohorts. The most common nonlabral procedures included femoroplasty (76%) and synovectomy (73%). There was no significant difference between the dysplasia and non-dysplasia groups regarding capsulotomy types and capsular closure rates (96% and 92%, respectively).Dysplasia, typically of borderline to mild severity, comprises a significant incidence of surgical cases (13%) by surgeons performing high-volume hip arthroscopy. Despite having similar preoperative pain and functional profiles to patients without dysplasia, dysplasia patients may have increased flexed-hip internal rotation. Commonly associated cam morphology significantly decreases internal rotation. Arthroscopic labral repair, femoroplasty, and closure of interportal capsulotomy are the most commonly performed procedures.Level III, therapeutic comparative case series.

Purpose To examine the prevalence and impact of athletic pubalgia (AP) surgery in elite American football athletes participating in the National Football League (NFL) Combine. Methods Results from 1,311 athletes participating in the Combine from 2012 to 2015 were evaluated. Athletes with a history of AP repair were identified using the NFL Combine Database. Athlete history and available imaging was reviewed. NFL performance based on draft status, games played, games started, and current status in the NFL was gathered using publicly available databases. Statistical analysis was performed to detect for significant associations between athlete history and NFL performance in the presence of AP repair and pelvic pathology on postsurgical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Results AP repair was identified in 4.2% (n = 55) of athletes. MRI was performed in 35% (n = 19 of 55) with AP repair, of which 53% (n = 10 of 19) had positive pathology. Athletes with repair were not at risk of playing ( P = .87) or starting ( P = .45) fewer regular season games, going undrafted ( P = .27), or not being on an active NFL roster ( P = .51). Compared with athletes with negative imaging findings, positive pathology on MRI did not have a significant impact on games played ( P = .74), games started ( P = .48), draft status ( P = .26), or being on an active roster ( P = .74). Offensive linemen ( P = .005) and athletes with a history of repair within 1 year of the Combine ( P = .03) had a significantly higher risk of possessing positive pathology on MRI. Conclusions Athletes with a history of successful AP surgery invited to the NFL Combine and those with persistent pathology on MRI are not at increased risk for diminished performance in the NFL. Offensive linemen and athletes less than 1 year out from surgery have a higher risk for positive MRI findings at the pubic symphysis. Level of Evidence Level IV, prognostic study-case series.

To investigate whether pelvic incidence (PI) in patients with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement was different from that in a normal population.Retrospective analysis of 30 consecutive female and 30 consecutive male patients with computed tomography scans who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAI. PI was measured using scout lateral radiographs. The center-edge angle (CEA), acetabular version, and α angle were also measured. Each patient was subcategorized as having a cam-type deformity (α angle55°), a deep socket deformity (CEA39°), and/or a retroverted acetabulum (acetabular anteversion15°). Our group and subgroups were compared with a historical control group from a previously published study of 300 volunteers. Each group was compared using a Student t test.Our mean PI was 49.31° ± 12.34° (range, 28.4°-79.5°), less than the asymptomatic historical control (n = 300) with a mean PI of 55.0° ± 10.6° (range, 33°-82°) (P.001). The subgroups for cam deformity, deep socket deformity, and acetabular retroversion have a mean PI of 48.89° ± 11.81°, 38.30° ± 7.56°, and 44.93° ± 11.32°, respectively. All had a significantly lower PI than the historical control (P.001, P.001, P.001, respectively).We conclude that patients presenting with FAI may have a lower PI than the general population. The clinical significance of a 5.7° difference in PI remains unknown.Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the hip capsule in a subset of symptomatic patients who underwent capsular closure during hip arthroscopy. Methods All patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with routine capsular closure between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015, were eligible. Only patients with unilateral surgery and a postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; ordered for persistent symptoms) were included. Four independent reviewers evaluated each hip capsule for thickness and the absence or presence of defects. Results During the study, 1,463 patients had hip arthroscopy for FAI with routine capsular closure, and 53 (3.6%) underwent a postoperative MRI. Fourteen of the 53 were excluded owing to revision status or additional procedures. The final study population included 39 patients (23 female patients and 16 male patients), with an average patient age of 31.7 ± 11.4 years and an average body mass index of 23.3 ± 2.9. There were 3 (7.5%) capsular defects, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.82. The operative hip capsule was significantly thicker in the zone of capsulotomy, and subsequent repair as compared with the unaffected, contralateral hip capsule (5.0 ± 1.2 mm vs 4.6 ± 1.4 mm; P = .02), ICC 0.83. Additionally, males had thicker hip capsules as compared with their female counterparts, on the operative side (5.4 ± 1.1 mm vs 4.5 ± 1.2 mm; P = .02) and the nonoperative side (4.8 ± 1.6 mm vs 4.1 ± 0.9 mm; P = .08). Conclusions In a subset of symptomatic patients after hip arthroscopy for FAI, the majority (92.5%) of the repaired hip capsules remained closed at greater than 1 year of follow-up. The hip capsule adjacent to the capsulotomy and subsequent repair is thickened compared with the same location on the contralateral, nonoperative hip. Aside from gender, patient-related and FAI-related factors do not correlate with capsular thickness nor do they seem to correlate with the propensity to develop a capsular defect. Level of Evidence Level IV, prognostic case series.