Search

Background: Labral augmentation has emerged as an essential procedure to address a deficient or irreparable labrum while preserving native labral tissue and restoring the hip suction seal mechanism. Purpose: To evaluate midterm outcomes of arthroscopic hip labral augmentation for labral insufficiency after previous hip arthroscopy. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients were identified from a prospectively collected database who underwent arthroscopic hip labral augmentation between January 2011 and January 2017 with a minimum 3-year follow-up. Pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcome scores were compared and included the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical and mental component summaries, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) (Activities of Daily Living [ADL] and Sport). Postoperative Tegner Activity Scale and patient satisfaction (1-10) scores were also evaluated. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) between the preoperative and minimum 3-year follow-up scores were calculated. Results: A total of 88 patients (39 men, 49 women) underwent revision hip arthroscopy with labral augmentation. The average age was 32.8 ± 11 years. Of these, 77 patients (88%) were available for the minimum 3-year follow-up. The survivorship (absence of conversion to total hip arthroplasty) at 3 years and 5 years was 93% at both time points, with a mean survival time of 8.5 years (95% CI, 8.0-8.9). Eleven patients (14%) required revision arthroscopic surgery for continued pain. Revisions occurred at a mean of 2.6 ± 1.4 years after augmentation. The mean follow-up was 5.2 ± 1.2 years (range, 3-9 years). For patients not requiring subsequent surgery (n = 61), all patient-reported outcome measures significantly improved, which included a 20-point increase in HOS-ADL (MCID, 82%; PASS, 72%) and mHHS (MCID, 78%; PASS, 70%). The median postoperative Tegner score was 4 (range, 1-10). The median postoperative patient satisfaction score was 9 out of 10 (range, 1-10). Conclusion: Arthroscopic hip labral augmentation is a successful treatment option for patients with labral insufficiency after previous hip arthroscopy, demonstrating improved patient-reported outcomes and survivorship of 93% at 3 years and 5 years. This technique provides a valuable labral preservation option when addressing hip labral pathology when viable native labral tissue remains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The role of hip arthroscopy in the treatment of patients with borderline hip dysplasia is controversial and evolving. Purpose: To evaluate outcomes at a minimum 10-year follow-up in patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement in a hip with borderline dysplasia. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: All hips that underwent labral repair between June 2006 and March 2009 for femoroacetabular impingement with borderline dysplasia were included if they had a lateral center-edge angle of 20° to 25°, had primary hip arthroscopy for the diagnosis of femoroacetabular impingement, and were aged 18 to 70 years. Patients were excluded if they had previous hip surgery, avascular necrosis, or fracture. Kaplan-Meier survivorship was performed, with survivorship defined as avoidance of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA). Results: A total of 45 patients met the inclusion criteria, and 38 were contacted at a minimum 10 years postoperatively (84%; mean ± SD, 12 ± 1.3 years). There were 23 women and 15 men with an average age of 41 ± 9.6 years (range, 25-69). Twenty patients were ≥40 years of age. In this patient cohort, survivorship was 87% at 5 years and 79% at 10 years for conversion to THA. Of the 38 patients included, 9 were converted to THA (24%), and 3 required revision hip arthroscopy (7%). Patient age, Tönnis grade, microfracture of cartilage lesions, and Tönnis angle >15° were associated with conversion to THA. No statistically significant differences were found between those who underwent conversion to THA and those who did not regarding lateral center-edge angle, Sharp angle, or alpha angle. Significant improvements were seen at follow-up of 12 years (range, 10-13) for the modified Harris Hip Score (58 to 83; P =.002), Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (70 to 87; P =.003), Hip Outcome Score–Sport (47 to 76; P =.004), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (31 to 10; P =.001). At follow-up, >80% maintained the minimal clinically important difference for the Hip Outcome Score (Activities of Daily Living and Sport) with no differences between patients aged <40 and ≥40 years. Conclusion: Risk factors for conversion to THA after hip arthroscopy in the borderline dysplastic hip included older age, higher Tönnis grades, grade 4 chondral lesions that were microfractures, and Tönnis angle >15°. In those patients who did not convert to THA, improvement in outcome measures was seen at 10 years. Careful patient selection is critical to the success of this procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Labral augmentation and labral reconstruction have emerged as essential procedures for restoring the anatomic and functional characteristics of the hip joint in patients with a deficient hip labrum or irreparable labral tear. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare allograft and autograft hip labral reconstruction and augmentation. We hypothesized that autografts would entail fewer revision arthroscopic procedures. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients were identified who underwent labral reconstruction or labral augmentation using iliotibial band (ITB) allograft or ITB autograft performed by a single surgeon between 2011 and 2017. Patient-reported outcome measures collected before surgery and at minimum 2-year follow-up included the following: Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living and Hip Outcome Score Sports-Specific Subscale and, at follow-up, patient satisfaction (range, 1-10, with 10 being very satisfied). Patients followed a standardized rehabilitation protocol after surgery with relative individualization to address each patient's needs. For continuous variables, comparisons between allografts and autografts were made using Student t tests or Mann-Whitney tests. Categorical comparisons were assessed using chi-square or Fisher exact test. Multiple logistic regression was performed to determine the influence of graft choice on risk of revision or THA. Results: A total of 205 hips met 2-year inclusion criteria. ITB allografts were used for 55 patients (37 augmentations, 18 reconstructions) and ITB autografts for 150 patients (34 augmentations, 116 reconstructions). Females represented a greater proportion of allograft versus autograft patients (71% vs 46%, respectively; P =.001). Overall, autograft patients had larger alpha angles (66.6° vs 59.1°; P =.001) and longer grafts (46 vs 41 mm; P =.03) compared with allograft patients. A total of 13 (23.6%) patients required revision surgery in the allograft group compared with 11 (7.3%) in the autograft group (P <.001). After controlling for sex, procedure (reconstruction vs augmentation), and previous surgery, the odds of revision were higher for allograft patients (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.5-11.6). No significant differences in conversion to THA were observed between groups (allograft = 9%; autograft = 6%; P =.50), even after adjustment for the above covariates (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 0.6-7.9). No differences in postoperative patient-reported outcome measures or patient satisfaction were observed between groups. Conclusion: Labral augmentation or reconstruction with autograft has a significantly lower revision rate than labral augmentation or reconstruction with allograft. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The treatment of pincer deformity in hip arthroscopy remains controversial, with some authors advocating that over resection may risk early joint deterioration. The role of acetabular resection depth and postoperative acetabular morphology on postoperative outcomes has yet to be defined. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study measures the influence of acetabular resection depth and postoperative lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) on minimum 5-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs), revision rates, and conversion to total hip arthroplasty using a single surgeon's prospective database. We hypothesized that patients with acetabular resections >10°, as measured by LCEA, or patients with postoperative LCEA outside the normal range of 25° to 35° would have lower PROs, higher revision rates, and higher conversion to total hip arthroplasty at midterm follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 192 patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with acetabuloplasty and labral repair by a single surgeon with a minimum 5-year follow-up met the inclusion criteria. Preoperative and postoperative LCEAs were measured on supine anteroposterior radiographs, and patients were divided into cohorts based on LCEA and acetabular resection depth. Cohorts for postoperative LCEA were <20° (dysplasia), 20° to 25° (borderline dysplasia), 25° to 35° (normal), and >35° (borderline overcoverage). Cohorts for acetabular resection depth were <5°, 5° to 10°, and >10° difference from preoperative to postoperative LCEA. Outcome measures included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey, modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score, satisfaction scores, revision rates, and conversion to arthroplasty rates. Results: Patients significantly improved in all outcome score measures at final follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences in PRO scores or conversion to total hip arthroplasty between any cohorts in the postoperative LCEA group. There were more revisions in the 25° to 35° cohort than the other cohorts (P =.02). The 5-10° resection depth cohort demonstrated a higher postoperative WOMAC score (P =.03), but otherwise no statistically significant differences were seen between resection depth cohorts in the remaining postoperative outcomes scores, revision rates, or conversion to total hip arthroplasty rates. Conclusion: Patients with postoperative LCEA values outside the normal reference range and with large resections perform similar to those with normal postoperative LCEA values and smaller resections at a minimum 5-year follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]