scholarly journals Hip Arthroscopy has Good Clinical Outcomes in the Treatment of Osteoid Osteoma of the Acetabulum

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanying Gao ◽  
Ruiqi Wu ◽  
Rongge Liu ◽  
Yingfang Ao ◽  
Jianquan Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Osteoid Osteoma ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Ct Images ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool

Abstract Background: Osteoid osteoma (OO) of the acetabulum is a relatively rare disease. The clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy for treatment of OO of the acetabulum is still uncertain.Methods: We evaluated consecutive patients who were diagnosed with OO of the acetabulum and underwent hip arthroscopy for treatment in our hospital between January 2013 and March 2020. All patients underwent preoperative physical examination. Preoperative supine anteroposterior hip radiographs, cross-table lateral radiographs, CT images, and MR images were obtained for all patients. Alpha angle and lateral center-edge angle were measured before surgery. Supine anteroposterior hip radiographs and CT images were obtained for all patients postoperatively. Preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including visual analog scale (VAS), the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and PROs at final follow-up were evaluated.Results: A total of 6 patients (mean age, 18.7 years; age range, 6-31 years; 5 males and 1 females) were included in this study. The average follow-up period after surgery was 28.3 months (range, 6–90 months). Before surgery, mean mHHS was 45.2±10.5 (range, 33-56), mean iHOT-12 was 33.3±14.5 (range, 13-49), and mean VAS was 8.2±1.0 (range, 7-9). At one month after surgery, mean mHHS was 78.7±1.9 (range, 77-81), iHOT-12 was 71.0±4.5 (range, 68-80), and mean VAS was 0. At the final post-operative follow-up, mean mHHS was 89.2±2.1 (range, 86-91), iHOT-12 was 93.5±5.0 (range, 88-98), and mean VAS was 0. All results, except VAS between one month after surgery and at final follow-up, demonstrated statistically significant improvement (P < 0.05). One patient underwent revision surgery.Conclusion: Hip arthroscopy has good clinical outcomes in the treatment of OO of the acetabulum.

scholarly journals Hip arthroscopy has good clinical outcomes in the treatment of osteoid osteoma of the acetabulum

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanying Gao ◽  
Ruiqi Wu ◽  
Rongge Liu ◽  
Yingfang Ao ◽  
Jianquan Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Osteoid Osteoma ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Outcome Tool

Abstract Background Osteoid osteoma (OO) of the acetabulum is a relatively rare disease. However, the the clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy for treatment of OO of the acetabulum are still uncertain. Methods We evaluated consecutive patients who were diagnosed with OO of the acetabulum and who underwent hip arthroscopy at our hospital between January 2013 and March 2020. All patients underwent a preoperative physical examination. Preoperative supine anteroposterior hip radiography, cross-table lateral radiographs, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging were performed in all patients. The alpha angle and lateral center-edge angle were measured before surgery. Supine anteroposterior hip radiography and CT were performed in all patients postoperatively. Preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and PROs at final follow-up were evaluated. Results A total of 6 patients (mean age, 18.7 years; age range, 6–31 years; 5 males and 1 females) were included in this study. The average follow-up period after surgery was 28.3 months (range, 6–90 months). Before surgery, the mean mHHS was 45.2 ± 10.5 (range, 33–56), the mean iHOT-12 was 33.3 ± 14.5 (range, 13–49), and mean VAS was 8.2 ± 1.0 (range, 7–9). At one month after surgery, mean mHHS was 78.7 ± 1.9 (range, 77–81), iHOT-12 was 71.0 ± 4.5 (range, 68–80), and mean VAS was 0. At the final post-operative follow-up, mean mHHS was 89.2 ± 2.1 (range, 86–91), iHOT-12 was 93.5 ± 5.0 (range, 88–98), and mean VAS was 0. All results, except VAS between one month after surgery and at final follow-up, demonstrated statistically significant improvement (P < 0.05). One patient underwent revision surgery. Conclusions Hip arthroscopy has good clinical outcomes in the treatment of OO of the acetabulum. Further study on the mechanism of secondary femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) caused by OO of the acetabulum is needed. More cases of arthroscopic excision and longer follow-up are also needed to better prove the clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy for OO of the acetabulum.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Revision Hip Arthroscopy for Synovial Chondromatosis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanying Gao ◽  
Hongjie Huang ◽  
Jianquan Wang ◽  
Yingfang Ao ◽  
Yan Xu
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Synovial Chondromatosis ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Radiographic Evaluation ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Outcome Tool

Abstract Background: Synovial chondromatosis (SC) is a relatively rare disease and there were few studies on causes and clinical outcomes of revision surgery for SC. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes of revision hip arthroscopy for synovial chondromatosis.Methods: We evaluated consecutive patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy for SC in our hospital between January 2008 and January 2020. Radiographic evaluation was made before and after surgery. Preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and PROs at final follow-up were obtained, including visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS).Results: A total of 8 patients (mean age, 39.5 years; age range, 27-62 years; 5 males and 3 females) were included in this study. The recurrence rate of hip SC in our hospital was 6.8%. The average follow-up period after surgery was 47.3 months (range, 12–120 months). Before surgery, mean mHHS was 60.6±17.3 (range, 20-77), mean iHOT-12 was 43.8±13.7 (range, 18-69), and mean VAS was 3.1±1.7 (range, 1-7). At the final post-operative follow-up, mean mHHS was 83.8±16.6 (range, 43-91), iHOT-12 was 80.6±19.7 (range, 32-90), and mean VAS was 0.6±1.8 (range, 0-5). All results demonstrated statistically significant improvement (P < 0.05). Recurrence of SC was found in 2 patients 1 year and 4 years after revision hip arthroscopy, respectively.Conclusion: Hip arthroscopy had good clinical outcomes for revision surgery of SC.

High Degree of Variability in Reporting of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy

2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (12) ◽  
pp. 3040-3046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Austin V. Stone ◽  
Cale A. Jacobs ◽  
T. David Luo ◽  
Molly C. Meadows ◽  
Shane J. Nho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
Size Standard ◽  
Pro Instruments

Background: Hip arthroscopy for the treatment of intra-articular pathology is a rapidly expanding field. Outcome measures should be reported to document the efficacy of arthroscopic procedures; however, the most effective outcome measures are not established. Purpose: To evaluate the variability in outcomes reported after hip arthroscopy and to compare the responsiveness of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: We reviewed primary hip arthroscopy literature between January 2011 and September 2016 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Patient and study characteristics were recorded. Pre- and postoperative means and SDs of PROs were recorded from articles that used 2 or more PROs with a 1-year minimum follow-up. From this subset of articles, we compared the responsiveness between PRO instruments using the effect size, standard response mean, and relative efficiency. Results: We identified 130 studies that met our inclusion/exclusion criteria, which totaled 16,970 patients (17,511 hips, mean age = 37.0 years, mean body mass index = 25.9 kg/m2). Radiographic measures were reported in 100 studies. The alpha angle and center-edge angle were the most common measures. Range of motion was reported in 81 of 130 articles. PROs were reported in 129 of 130 articles, and 21 different PRO instruments were identified. The mean number of PROs per article was 3.2, and 78% used 2 or more PROs. The most commonly used PRO was the modified Harris Hip Score, followed by the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)–Activities of Daily Living, HOS-Sport, visual analog scale, and Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS). The 2 most responsive PRO tools were the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT)–12 and the NAHS. Conclusion: Outcomes reporting is highly variable in the hip arthroscopy literature. More than 20 different PRO instruments have been used, which makes comparison across studies difficult. A uniform set of outcome measures would allow for clearer interpretation of the hip arthroscopy literature and offer potential conclusions from pooled data. On the basis of our comparative responsiveness results and previously reported psychometric properties of the different PRO instruments, we recommend more widespread adoption of the iHOT PROs instruments to assess hip arthroscopy outcomes.

scholarly journals Prospective Randomized Comparison of Capsule Management Techniques During Hip Arthroscopy

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3_suppl2) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kostas John Economopoulos ◽  
Christopher Y. Kweon
Keyword(s):  
Activities Of Daily Living ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Labral Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Outcome Score ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Management Techniques

Objectives: Capsular management during hip arthroscopy remains controversial. Studies evaluating this topic consist mostly of retrospective comparative reviews of prospectively gathered data on a large series of patients. The purpose of this study was to perform a prospective randomized trial to comparatively assess three commonly performed capsule management techniques. It was hypothesized that capsular closure during hip arthroscopy would result in superior outcomes compared to non-closing capsulotomy management techniques. Methods: Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy were randomly assigned into three groups at the time of surgery: 1) T-capsulotomy without closure (TC), 2) interportal capsulotomy without closure (IC), and 3) interportal capsulotomy with closure (CC). Inclusion criteria included patients with labral tear on advanced imaging, cam lesion with alpha angle greater than 55 degrees, center-edge angle less than 40 degrees, and Tönnis grade 0 or 1. Patients younger than 18, older than 55, or those with signs of clinical hip hypermobility or radiographic dysplasia were excluded from the trial. All patients underwent labral repair and femoral osteoplasty. Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS) was obtained preoperatively and at intervals up to 2 years. Other outcomes obtained included need for future hip surgery. Results: 50 patients were randomly allocated into each group. Patient demographics, preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and radiographic measures of impingement were similar between all three groups. Revision hip arthroscopy was performed in 5 TC patients, 2 IC patients and 0 CC patients (p=0.17). Conversion to hip arthroplasty occurred in 4 patients in the TC group, none in the IC or CC groups (p=0.48). All three groups showed increased PRO scores postoperatively compared to preoperative values (p<0.01). The CC group when compared to the TC group demonstrated superior mHHS (86.2 vs 76), HOS-ADL (85.6 vs 76.8), and HOS-SSS (74.4 vs 65.3) at the final 2 year follow up (p<0.001). The IC group demonstrated more modest improvements in outcomes compared to the TC group. The CC group showed greater improvement in HOS-SSS compared to the IC group at early follow up (65.6 vs 55.1, p>.001) that was not maintained at 2 years (74.4 vs 71.4, p=.28). Conclusion: Patients undergoing capsular closure during hip arthroscopy showed improved patient-reported and surgical outcomes compared to those with unrepaired T-capsulotomy or interportal capsulotomy. These results suggest that repair after capsulotomy may be a favorable arthroscopic capsule management technique, especially in respect to optimizing postoperative activities of daily living.

Predictors of Clinical Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy: A Prospective Analysis of 1038 Patients With 2-Year Follow-up

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 1324-1330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin G. Domb ◽  
Timothy J. Martin ◽  
Chengcheng Gui ◽  
Sivashankar Chandrasekaran ◽  
Carlos Suarez-Ahedo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Multivariate Analyses ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms ◽  
Outcome Instrument ◽  
Outcome Score ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: As hip arthroscopy has expanded in popularity and volume, more information is needed about indications for the procedure and the predictive factors of clinical outcomes. Purpose: To evaluate clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy in a prospective study and to analyze the cohort to identify factors that are predictive of improvement. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were collected prospectively on all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between February 2008 and June 2012. We included all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy who agreed to participate and who completed 4 patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments at a minimum 2-year follow-up: the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale. The NAHS was selected as our primary outcome instrument. All patients with any previous hip conditions were excluded. We analyzed 34 preoperative and intraoperative variables using bivariate and multivariate analyses compared with NAHS. Results: The cohort consisted of 1038 patients with a mean follow-up of 30.1 months (range, 24.0-61.2 months). Mean age was 36.4 years (range, 13.2-76.4 years). All postoperative PRO scores showed significant improvement ( P < .001) at 2 years compared with preoperative scores. Bivariate analysis identified 15 variables (7 categorical and 8 continuous) and multivariate analysis identified 10 variables that were predictive of 2-year postoperative NAHS. Preoperative NAHS, preoperative HOS-ADL, preoperative mHHS, age, duration of symptoms, body mass index (BMI), and revision hip arthroscopy were identified as predictive factors in both bivariate and multivariate analyses. The predictive value of preoperative NAHS was accentuated for patients with higher BMI. Conclusion: This study reports favorable clinical outcomes in the largest cohort of hip arthroscopies with a minimum 2-year follow-up in the literature to date. Factors identified as predictive in both bivariate and multivariate analyses included preoperative NAHS, HOS-ADL, and mHHS; age; duration of symptoms; BMI; and revision hip arthroscopy. These predictive factors may be useful to the clinician in determining prognosis and operative indications for hip arthroscopy.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes after Arthroscopic Repair of Gluteus Medius with a Two-year Minimum Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0044
Author(s):  
David Bloom ◽  
David Kirby ◽  
Thomas Youm ◽  
Jordan Fried
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Gluteus Medius ◽  
Arthroscopic Repair ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Partial Group ◽  
Patient Reported

Objectives: Hip arthroscopy has replaced the need for many open surgeries including repairs of gluteus medius tendon tear. There are only a few studies that have analyzed patient reported outcomes at 2 years for arthroscopic gluteus medius tendon repair. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients who underwent arthroscopic gluteus medius repair with at least 2 year follow-up. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective IRB approved study. Between August 2010 and August 2016, patients who underwent hip arthroscopy with gluteus medius repair by a single surgeon were evaluated at baseline and two year follow-up via Modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS) and Non-arthritic Hip Score (NAHS). Inclusion criteria included all patients who received arthroscopic repair of the full or partial thickness tears of the gluteus medius tendon and had a minimum follow up of at least two years. Paired t-test was used for statistical comparison between baseline and follow-up for each respective outcome score and group. Results: 20 hips were evaluated, met the inclusion criteria and separated based on partial (group one) or full thickness tear (group two). The study population comprised of 15 (79%) females and 4 (21%) males. Group one presented with a mean age of 54.8 ± 11.3 years and an average BMI of 25.1 ± 4.0. Group two presented with a mean age of 46 ± 11.4 and an average BMI of 25.5 ± 4.0. Patients in group one reported an average preoperative MHHS and NAHS of 33.6 ± 11.3 and 40.4 ± 14.9, respectively. At 2 year follow-up, an average MHHS and NAHS of 72.9 ± 22.9 and 77.2 ± 19.7 was reported, respectively. Patients in group two reported an average preoperative MHHS and NAHS of 43.8 ± 14.7 and 46.4 ± 8.3, respectively. At 2 year follow-up, an average MHHS and NAHS of 80.1 ± 8.5 and 79.5 ± 10.1, respectively. There was significant clinical improvement at the 2 year follow-up, relating to both outcome measures in each subject group (p<0.0004). Conclusions: After a minimum of two years for follow-up, arthroscopic repair of gluteus medius tears proves to be an effective approach and treatment. In the future, studies looking at longer follow-up time would help determine if the current approach maintains long-term clinical improvement.

scholarly journals Pre-operative and Post-Operative Alpha Angles are Significant Independent Predictors of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures at Two Years After Hip Arthroscopy

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (7_suppl4) ◽  
pp. 2325967118S0017
Author(s):  
Drew A. Lansdown ◽  
Kyle Kunze ◽  
Gift Ukwuani ◽  
Brian Robert Waterman ◽  
William H. Neal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Arthroscopic Surgery ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Joint Space Width ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Multivariate Modeling ◽  
Center Edge ◽  
Patient Reported

Objectives: Residual impingement after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a common cause for re-operation; however, the relationship between preoperative and postoperative radiographic parameters and patient-reported outcomes has not been defined. Methods: 749 consecutive patients were reviewed two years after primary hip arthroscopy. Patients undergoing revision surgery were excluded. Pre-operative and post-operative radiographs were analyzed to measure the alpha angle on standardized anteroposterior (AP) pelvis, Dunn-lateral, and false profile (FP) views and anterior and lateral center-edge angles (ACEA, LCEA). Univariate analysis evaluated the association between demographic variables, radiographic measures and hip outcome scores (Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living (ADL), HOS-Sports Specific (SS), and Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS)). Multivariate modeling was subsequently performed. Significance was defined as p<0.05. Results: 706 patients with mean age of 33.2±12.3 years and mean BMI 25.1± 5kg/m2 were included for final analysis. The alpha angle on the AP, Dunn-lateral, and FP views and the ACEA and LCEA decreased after surgery (p<0.001 for all). Significant univariate correlations with the postoperative HOS-ADL included age, BMI, pre-operative AP, FP, and Dunn and postoperative FP alpha angles. Postoperative HOS-SS was correlated with age, BMI, medial post-operative joint space width (JSW), pre-operative AP, FP, and Dunn and postoperative FP alpha angles, and pre-operative and post-operative (ACEA). Postoperative mHHS correlated with age, BMI, post-operative lateral JSW, pre-operative AP, FP, and Dunn and postoperative FP and Dunn alpha angles, and post-operative ACEA. Multivariate modeling (Table 2) demonstrated that preoperative and postoperative FP alpha angles were independent predictors of postoperative outcomes. Conclusion: Pre-operative and post-operative alpha angles were negatively correlated with the HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, and mHHS at 2 years after arthroscopic surgery for FAI. Specifically, pre-operative and postoperative FP alpha angles were independent predictors of postoperative outcomes. These results highlight the importance of resecting anterior cam lesions to prevent residual impingement and inferior outcomes. [Table: see text]

Acetabular microfracture in hip arthroscopy: clinical outcomes with minimum 5-year follow-up

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 649-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin G Domb ◽  
Danil Rybalko ◽  
Brian Mu ◽  
Jody Litrenta ◽  
Austin W Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Significant Deterioration ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score ◽  
Mid Term Results

Introduction: There is a paucity in the literature regarding mid-term results of microfracture in hip arthroscopy. We aim to assess 5-year outcomes of patients who underwent acetabular microfracture for full-thickness chondral lesions as a part of hip arthroscopy. Methods: Between August 2008 and September 2011, data were prospectively gathered for patients undergoing acetabular microfracture during hip arthroscopy with minimum 5-year follow-up. All patients were assessed pre- and postoperatively, with modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score – Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS). International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) and satisfaction were collected postoperatively. Exclusion criteria included previous hip conditions, or preoperative Tönnis grade ≥2. Results: Fifty three hips were eligible for this study. Of these, 43 (81.1%) hips in 42 patients had follow-up. The study group had a male majority (65.1%) and an average age of 44.4 ± 9.5 years. There was statistically significant improvement in all patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and VAS at follow-up. Patient satisfaction was 7.6 ± 2.6. A comparison of 2-year to minimum 5-year follow-up results identified no statistically significant deterioration in PROs, VAS, and patient satisfaction. Survivorship was 72.1% with 12 patients converted to total hip arthroplasty (THA). 4 patients (10.8%) underwent secondary arthroscopy. Conclusions: In the mid-term, microfracture as a part of hip arthroscopy demonstrated favourable outcomes and 72% survivorship. Careful patient selection is warranted to limit the risk of conversion to THA.

scholarly journals Outcomes of arthroscopic femoroplasty in patients with cam lesions: Minimum 2-year follow-up

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 230949902094204
Author(s):  
Yong-Chan Ha ◽  
Jae-Young Lim ◽  
Yoo-Sun Won ◽  
Young-Kyun Lee ◽  
Kyung-Hoi Koo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Alpha Angle ◽  
Visual Analog Scale Score ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Preoperative Pain ◽  
Military Population ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score

Purpose: Successful arthroscopic femoroplasty in patients with cam lesions have been reported in Western countries in the last two decades. However, the outcomes after arthroscopic femoroplasty in Asia have thus far only been reported in patients with borderline dysplasia and in the military population. This retrospective study was designed to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes and radiologic outcomes after hip arthroscopy in patients with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) at a minimum postoperative follow-up of 2 years. Methods: From January 2013 to December 2016, 204 hip arthroscopy procedures were performed. Of these cases, 62 patients (73 hips) underwent hip arthroscopy for cam-type FAI. Results: Of the 73 hips, 65 (89.0%) achieved gratified reduction or elimination of preoperative pain. The clinical outcomes showed improvement in scores from before surgery to the last follow-up: 67.1 ± 15.0 to 90.2 ± 6.3 for the modified Harris hip score ( p < 0.001), 4.7 ± 2.5 to 7.1 ± 1.4 for the University of California Los Angeles score ( p < 0.001), and 7.4 ± 1.9 to 1.8 ± 1.5 for the visual analog scale score ( p < 0.001). In radiologic assessments, significant improvement was observed in the alpha angle from a mean 60.9° to 49.5° ( p < 0.001) and in the head–neck offset from a mean of 3.3 mm to 6.3 mm ( p < 0.001). Of the 73 hips, 65 (89.0%) achieved satisfactory reduction or elimination of preoperative pain. In subgroup analysis for the sufficiency of femoroplasty (alpha angle < 55°), the clinical outcomes were not different between the two groups. Conclusion: Arthroscopic femoroplasty resulted in an 89% satisfaction at the 2-year follow-up. Therefore, hip arthroscopic femoroplasty might be an excellent alternative to open surgery and offers a greater probability of good to excellent results.

An Iliopsoas Impingement Lesion in the Absence of Painful Internal Snapping May Not Require Iliopsoas Fractional Lengthening

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (11) ◽  
pp. 2747-2754
Author(s):  
Mitchell B. Meghpara ◽  
Rishika Bheem ◽  
Samantha C. Diulus ◽  
Philip J. Rosinsky ◽  
Jacob Shapira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Matching Process ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool ◽  
Modified Harris Hip Score ◽  
Pain Patients

Background: Iliopsoas impingement (IPI) has been associated with a distinct lesion on the anterior labrum. Iliopsoas fractional lengthening (IFL) can treat IPI in instances of painful internal snapping (PIS) and mechanical groin pain. Purpose: To report minimum 2-year outcomes of patients without PIS who had an IPI lesion diagnosed intraoperatively that did not undergo IFL (+IPI –PIS –IFL) as compared with a matched group of patients with PIS and an IPI lesion that was treated with IFL (+IPI +PIS +IFL). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data on all patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between May 2009 and June 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they underwent hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement–related pathology, an IPI lesion was diagnosed intraoperatively, and they had minimum 2-year postoperative scores for the following: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), iHOT-12 (International Hip Outcome Tool–12), patient satisfaction, and visual analog score (VAS) for pain. Patients were propensity score matched based on the following criteria: age, body mass index, follow-up time, sex, labral treatment, femoroplasty, and acetabuloplasty. Results: A total of 412 hips were eligible for the current study, of which 336 (81.6%) had 2-year follow-up. The matching process established 37 hips in the +IPI –PIS –IFL group and 87 hips in the +IPI +PIS +IFL group. Both groups experienced significant improvements from presurgery to latest follow-up for all recorded patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The +IPI –PIS –IFL group compared favorably with the +IPI +PIS +IFL group for mHHS (86.0 vs 86.1; P = .53), NAHS (83.0 vs 84.7; P = .40), and HOS-SSS (78.1 vs 76.5; P = .87). Additionally, iHOT-12, VAS, patient satisfaction, and rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference for mHHS, NAHS, and HOS-SSS were similar between groups at the latest follow-up. Conclusion: Patients without PIS who were diagnosed with an IPI lesion intraoperatively and did not undergo IFL had similar and favorable improvements in PROs, VAS, and satisfaction to a matched cohort with PIS who had IFL performed. Thus, an IPI lesion in the absence of PIS may not require IFL.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document