Open and Endoscopic Gluteus Medius/Minimus Repair Achieves Clinical Success Regardless of Tear Grade: High-Grade Fatty Infiltration Portends Worse Outcomes.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate minimum 2-year gluteus medius/minimus repair clinical success rates stratified by the Three-Grade Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Based Classification (MRI-Grade). Secondary aims were to evaluate clinical success rates by the surgical approach used at each MRI-Grade and by the Goutallier-Fuchs (GF) classification. METHODS: A retrospective review identified patients who underwent primary endoscopic or open gluteus medius/minimus repair from 2012 to 2021 by a single surgeon. Preoperative MRIs were classified using the MRI-Grade and GF classifications. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up. Cohort-specific minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) achievement was recorded. Clinical success rates, defined as achievement of 2-year MCID or PASS with avoidance of revision surgery, were compared by MRI-Grade, by surgical approach at each MRI-Grade, and by GF classification. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (MRI Grade 1=71, Grade 2=19, Grade 3=22) were included. MRI-Grade 1 patients underwent endoscopic repair (p<0.001) more often compared to the other groups. The overall clinical success rate was 90%. Clinical success rates by MRI-Grade were: Grade 1=93%, Grade 2=95%, Grade 3=77% (P=0.087). Clinical success rates by the endoscopic and open surgical approaches used at each MRI-Grade were: Grade 1: 93% vs. 90% (P=0.543), Grade 2: 91% vs. 100% (P=1.000), Grade 3: 60% vs. 92% (P=0.135). GF Grade 1 tears achieved a higher rate of clinical success compared to GF Grade 4 tears (100% vs. 71%, P=0.030). CONCLUSION: Primary repair of gluteus medius/minimus tears resulted in clinical success in most patients irrespective of MRI-Grade and irrespective of the surgical approach used at each MRI-Grade, yet GF Grade 1 tears showed a significantly higher clinical success rate compared to GF Grade 4 tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Retrospective Case Series.

Primary and Revision Hip Arthroscopy in Borderline Hip Dysplasia Shows Comparable Outcomes at Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs), achievement of clinically significant outcomes (CSOs), and reoperation-free survivorship between primary and revision hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in propensity-matched borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) patients at minimum 5-year follow-up. METHODS: Patients with BHD, characterized by a lateral center-edge angle 18°-25°, who underwent HA for FAIS with capsular repair by a single surgeon between 01/2012-06/2018 with minimum 5-year follow-up were identified. Cases of revision HA were propensity-matched 1:2 to cases of primary HA, controlling for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). A 1:2 ratio was chosen to maximize the number of included patients. Collected PROs included: Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living and Sport Subscales, International Hip Outcome Score 12, modified Harris Hip Score, and Visual Analog Scale for Pain. Achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for any measured PRO were compared between groups along with reoperation-free survivorship using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-six revision HA hips (34 patients) were propensity-matched to 72 primary HA hips (70 patients). The groups were similar in age (31.5±10.3 years vs. 30.5±11.2,P=0.669), sex (69.4% female vs. 70.8%,P=0.656), and BMI (25.7±4.0 kg/m2 vs. 25.5±3.7,P=0.849). The revision group showed a greater prevalence of prolonged preoperative pain (50.0% vs. 27.8%,P=0.032) compared to the primary group. A significant improvement in all PROs was observed for both groups with comparable PROs preoperatively and at 5-year follow-up between groups (P≥0.086). The revision and primary groups showed comparable MCID (95.0% vs. 95.7%,P=1.000), PASS (80.0% vs. 83.6%,P=0.757), and SCB (62.5% vs. 70.7%,P=0.603) achievement for any PRO. Comparable reoperation-free survivorship was observed (P=0.151). CONCLUSION: Propensity-matched patients with BHD undergoing primary and revision hip arthroscopy for FAIS achieved similar minimum 5-year PROs, CSOs, and reoperation-free survivorship. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Comparative Case Series.

Outcome Scores and Survivorship of Patients Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy With Borderline Hip Dysplasia: A Propensity-Matched Study With Minimum 10-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) and concomitant femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) have demonstrated similar outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up compared with equivalent patients without dysplasia. However, comparisons between these groups at long-term follow-up have yet to be investigated. PURPOSE: To compare long-term clinical outcomes between patients with BHD undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS versus matched control patients without BHD. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with BHD (lateral center-edge angle, 18°-25°) who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS between January 2012 and February 2013. Patients were propensity matched in a 1:3 ratio by age, sex, and body mass index to control patients without BHD who underwent primary hip arthroscopy. Groups were compared in terms of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) preoperatively and at 10 years postoperatively, including the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) and Sports subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score, 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction. Achievement rates for minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were assessed between groups. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 10.3 ± 0.3 years, 28 patients with BHD (20 women; age, 30.8 ± 10.8 years) were matched to 84 controls who underwent primary hip arthroscopy. Both groups significantly improved from preoperative assessment in all PRO measures at 10 years (P < .001 for all). PRO scores were similar between groups, aside from HOS-SS (BHD, 62.9 ± 31.9 vs controls, 80.1 ± 26.0; P = .030). Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups for all PROs (HOS-ADL: BHD, 76.2% vs controls, 67.9%, P = .580; HOS-SS: BHD, 63.2% vs controls, 69.4%, P = .773; modified Harris Hip Score: BHD, 76.5% vs controls, 67.9%, P = .561; VAS pain: BHD, 75.0% vs controls, 91.7%, P = .110). Rates of PASS achievement were significantly lower in the BHD group for HOS-ADL (BHD, 39.1% vs controls, 77.4%; P = .002), HOS-SS (BHD, 45.5% vs controls, 84.7%; P = .001), and VAS pain (BHD, 50.0% vs controls, 78.5%; P = .015). No significant difference was found in the rate of subsequent reoperation on the index hip between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated comparable survivorship at long-term follow-up (P = .645). CONCLUSION: After primary hip arthroscopy, patients with BHD in the setting of FAIS had significantly improved PRO scores at 10-year follow-up, comparable with propensity-matched controls without BHD. Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups, although patients with BHD had lower rates of PASS achievement. Patients with BHD had similar long-term hip arthroscopy survivorship compared with controls, with no significant difference in rates of revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

Indirect Head of the Rectus Femoris Tendon as a Graft for Segmental Hip Labral Reconstruction: An Anatomic, Radiographical, and Biomechanical Study in Comparison With Iliotibial Labral Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The indirect head of the rectus femoris (IHRF) tendon has been used as an autograft for segmental labral reconstruction. However, the biomechanical properties and anatomic characteristics of the IHRF, as they relate to surgical applications, have yet to be investigated. PURPOSE: To (1) quantitatively and qualitatively describe the anatomy of IHRF and its relationship with surrounding arthroscopically relevant landmarks; (2) detail radiographic findings pertinent to IHRF; (3) biomechanically assess segmental labral reconstruction with IHRF, including restoration of the suction seal and contact pressures in comparison with iliotibial band (ITB) reconstruction; and (4) assess potential donor-site morbidity caused by graft harvesting. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive laboratory study. METHODS: A cadaveric study was performed using 8 fresh-frozen human cadaveric full pelvises and 7 hemipelvises. Three-dimensional anatomic measurements were collected using a 3-dimensional coordinate digitizer. Radiographic analysis was accomplished by securing radiopaque markers of different sizes to the evaluated anatomic structures of the assigned hip.Suction seal and contact pressure testing were performed over 3 trials on 6 pelvises under 4 different testing conditions for each specimen: intact, labral tear, segmental labral reconstruction with ITB, and segmental labral reconstruction with IHRF. After IHRF tendon harvest, each full pelvis had both the intact and contralateral hip tested under tension along its anatomic direction to assess potential site morbidity, such as tendon failure or bony avulsion. RESULTS: The centroid and posterior apex of the indirect rectus femoris attachment are respectively located 10.3 ± 2.6 mm and 21.0 ± 6.5 mm posteriorly, 2.5 ± 7.8 mm and 0.7 ± 8.0 mm superiorly, and 5.0 ± 2.8 mm and 22.2 ± 4.4 mm laterally to the 12:30 labral position. Radiographically, the mean distance of the IHRF to the following landmarks was determined as follows: anterior inferior iliac spine (8.8 ± 2.5 mm), direct head of the rectus femoris (8.0 ± 3.9 mm), 12-o'clock labral position (14.1 ± 2.8 mm), and 3-o'clock labral position (36.5 ± 4.4 mm). During suction seal testing, both the ITB and the IHRF reconstruction groups had significantly lower peak loads and lower energy to peak loads compared with both intact and tear groups (P = .01 to .02 for all comparisons). There were no significant differences between the reconstruction groups for peak loads, energy, and displacement at peak load. In 60° of flexion, there were no differences in normalized contact pressure and contact area between ITB or IHRF reconstruction groups (P > .99). There were no significant differences between intact and harvested specimen groups in donor-site morbidity testing. CONCLUSION: The IHRF tendon is within close anatomic proximity to arthroscopic acetabular landmarks. In the cadaveric model, harvesting of the IHRF tendon as an autograft does not lead to significant donor-site morbidity in the remaining tendon. Segmental labral reconstruction performed with the IHRF tendon exhibits similar biomechanical outcomes compared with that performed with ITB. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study demonstrates the viability of segmental labral reconstruction with an IHRF tendon and provides a detailed anatomic description of the tendon in the context of an arthroscopic labral reconstruction. Clinicians can use this information during the selection of a graft and as a guide during an arthroscopic graft harvest.

3.0T magnetic resonance imaging-based hip bone models for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome are equivalent to computed tomography-based models.

This study aimed to compare three-dimensional (3D) proximal femoral and acetabular surface models generated from 3.0T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to the clinical gold standard of computed tomography (CT). Ten intact fresh-frozen cadaveric hips underwent CT and 3.0T MRI scans. The CT- and MRI-based segmented models were superimposed using a validated 3D-3D registration volume-merge method to compare them. The least surface-to-surface distance between the models was calculated by a point-to-surface calculation algorithm using a custom-written program. The variables of interest were the signed and absolute surface-to-surface distance between the paired bone models. One-sample t-tests were performed using a signed and absolute test value of 0.16 mm and 0.37 mm, respectively, based on a previous study that validated 1.5T MRI bone models by comparison with CT bone models. For the femur, the average signed and absolute surface-to-surface distance was 0.18 ± 0.09 mm and 0.30 ± 0.06 mm, respectively. There was no difference in the signed surface-to-surface distance and the 0.16 mm test value (t = 0.650, p = 0.532). However, the absolute surface-to-surface difference was less than the 0.37 mm test value (t = -4.025, p = 0.003). For the acetabulum, the average signed and absolute surface-to-surface distance was -0.06 ± 0.06 mm and 0.26 ± 0.04 mm, respectively. The signed (t = -12.569, p < 0.001) and absolute (t = -8.688, p < 0.001) surface-to-surface difference were less than the 0.16 mm and 0.37 mm test values, respectively. Our data shows that 3.0T MRI bone models are more similar to CT bone models than previously validated 1.5T MRI bone models. This is likely due to the higher resolution of the 3T data.

Outcomes of Flexibility Sport Athletes With Borderline Hip Dysplasia After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis at Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy has proved successful in treating femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients with and without borderline hip dysplasia (BHD). Despite a high prevalence of BHD in patients who participate in sports with high flexibility requirements, a paucity of literature evaluates the efficacy of hip arthroscopy in treating FAIS in flexibility sport athletes with BHD. PURPOSE: To compare minimum 2-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and achievement of clinically significant outcomes in flexibility sport athletes with BHD undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS with capsular plication with results in flexibility sport athletes without dysplasia. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected for patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS with BHD, defined as a lateral center-edge angle of 18° to 25°, who reported participation in a sport with a high flexibility requirement, including dance, gymnastics, figure skating, yoga, cheerleading, and martial arts, according to previous literature. These patients were matched 1:2 to flexibility sport athletes without dysplasia, controlling for age, sex, and body mass index. Preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative PROs were collected and compared between groups. Cohort-specific minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state achievement was compared between groups. RESULTS: In total, 52 flexibility sport athletes with BHD were matched to 104 flexibility sport athletes without BHD. Both groups showed similar sport participation (P = .874) and a similar level of competition (P = .877). Preoperative lateral center-edge angle (22.2°± 1.6° vs 31.5°± 3.9°; P < .001) and Tönnis angle (10.9°± 3.7° vs 5.8°± 4.4°; P < .001) differed between groups. Capsular plication was performed in all cases. Both groups achieved significant improvement in all PROs (P < .001) with no differences in postoperative PROs between groups (P≥ .147). High minimal clinically important difference (BHD group: 95.7%; control group: 94.8%) and patient acceptable symptom state (BHD group: 71.7%; control group: 72.2%) achievement for any PRO was observed with no differences between groups (P≥ .835). CONCLUSION: Flexibility sport athletes with BHD achieved similar outcomes as those of flexibility sport athletes without BHD after hip arthroscopy for FAIS with capsular plication.

Hip Arthroscopy Patients With Lower Back Pain Show Delayed Clinical Improvement and Inferior Time-Dependent Survivorship: A Propensity Matched Study at Mid-Term Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship at mid-term follow-up after hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients with and without preoperative lower back pain (LBP). METHODS: Patients with self-endorsed preoperative LBP who underwent HA for FAIS with mid-term follow-up were identified and propensity matched 1:1 to patients without back pain by age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). PROs collected preoperatively and at postoperative years 1, 2, and 5 included Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain. Achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were compared. Survivorship was compared with Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: In total, 119 patients with LBP were matched to 119 patients without LBP. Group demographic factors were as follows: age (37.4 ± 11.9 vs 37.6 ± 12.6 years, P = .880), sex (64.4% vs 67.7% female, P = .796), and BMI (25.3 ± 5.1 vs 25.3 ± 5.4, P = .930). Average follow-up duration was 6.0 ± 1.9 years. LBP patients showed similar preoperative PROs, yet lower 1-year scores for all PROs (P ≤ .044). At final follow-up, similar PROs were shown between groups (P ≥ .196). LBP and non-LBP patients had similar MCID achievement for HOS-ADL (59.3% vs 63.1%, P = .640), HOS-SS (73.9% vs 70.8%, P = .710), mHHS (66.7% vs 73.4%, P = .544), iHOT-12 (85.1% vs 79.4%, P = .500), and VAS Pain (75.6% vs 69.9%, P = .490). Groups also had similar PASS achievement for HOS-ADL (63.5% vs 61.3%, P = .777), HOS-SS (57.0% vs 62.5%, P = .461), mHHS (81.9% vs 79.1%, P = .692), iHOT-12 (54.6% vs 61.2%, P = .570), and VAS Pain (51.0% vs 55.4%, P = .570). Additionally, achievement of MCID ≥ 1 PRO (P ≥ .490) and PASS ≥ 1 PRO (P ≥ .370) was similar across groups. Conversion to total hip arthroplasty occurred in 3.4% of hips with LBP and 0.8% of hips without LBP (P = .370). Back pain patients demonstrated inferior time-dependent survivorship compared with patients without back pain on Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS with LBP achieve comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes to patients without back pain at mid-term, despite lower 1-year PRO scores. LBP patients show inferior reoperation-free time-dependent survivorship compared with those without LBP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative case series.

Six-Month Outcomes Correlate With 10-Year Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

PURPOSE: To identify whether 6-month outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) correlate with outcomes at minimum 10-year follow-up. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS from 2012 to 2013 were reviewed and included if they had 6-month and minimum 10-year follow-up. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures included the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) subscale, Hip Outcome Score Sports-Specific (HOS-SS) subscale, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and VAS for satisfaction. We compared 6-month and 10-year outcome scores and analyzed the relations between 6-month and 1-, 2-, 5-, and 10-year outcome scores using Pearson correlation coefficients (r). Six-month scores and clinically significant outcome achievement were then compared with 10-year clinically significant outcome achievement and reoperations, including revision hip arthroscopy and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), using logistic regressions and the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: This study included 60 patients (60.0% female sex; mean age, 36.0 ± 12.2 years). The mHHS, VAS pain score, and VAS satisfaction score significantly improved from 6-month to 10-year follow-up (P ≤ .021), whereas the HOS-ADL and HOS-SS did not (P ≥ .072). There were significant correlations between 6-month and 10-year scores for the HOS-ADL (r = 0.505), HOS-SS (r = 0.592), and mHHS (r = 0.362) (P ≤ .022 for all), as well as significant correlations between 6-month and 1-, 2-, and 5-year scores (P ≤ .014 for all). The 6-month HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, and mHHS were all significantly associated with their respective 10-year achievement of the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) (P ≤ .044). Furthermore, 6-month HOS-ADL and mHHS were significantly associated with THA conversion (P ≤ .041). Comparable 6-month and 10-year achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (96.5% vs 97.8%, P > .999) and PASS (85.2% vs 87.5%, P > .999) for any PRO was observed. CONCLUSIONS: After hip arthroscopy for FAIS, patients' 6-month HOS-ADL and mHHS were significantly associated with their 10-year PROs, PASS achievement, and THA conversion, although correlation strengths decreased with increasing time from surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Gluteus Repair Yields Satisfactory Clinically Significant Outcome Achievement by 1 Year in Mostly Partial-Thickness Tears With Preoperative Hip Abduction Weakness Associated With Delayed Achievement.

PURPOSE: To define the time to achievement of clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) after primary gluteus medius and/or minimus (GM) repair and to identify factors associated with delayed CSO achievement. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary GM repair between January 2012 and June 2021 with complete preoperative, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) were retrospectively identified. Cohort-specific minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were calculated. The time to achievement of MCID and PASS was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Median time to MCID and PASS achievement was recorded. Multivariate stepwise Cox regressions were used to identify factors associated with delayed CSO achievement. RESULTS: Fifty GM repairs were identified (age 59.4 ± 9.7 years, body mass index 27.9 ± 6.2, 94% female). Tears were grade 1 in 39 cases, grade 2 in 7 cases, and grade 3 in 4 cases. Endoscopic repair was performed in 35 cases, and open repair was performed in 15 cases. Labral debridement and repair were each performed in 15 cases. Median time to CSO achievement was 5.7 months for MCID and 11.0 months for PASS. The 2-year cumulative probability of MCID and PASS achievement was 92.7% and 66.7%, respectively. Preoperative hip abduction weakness on physical examination was associated with delayed achievement of MCID (hazard ratio 2.27, confidence interval 1.067-7.41, P = .039) and PASS (hazard ratio 3.89, confidence interval 1.341-11.283, P = .012). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that in patients undergoing repair of primarily grade 1 GM tears, most achieved MCID by 6 months, and more than one half achieved PASS by 12 months. Preoperative hip abduction weakness on physical examination was associated with delayed CSO achievement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Computer-Assisted Arthroscopic Cam Resection.

Determining the appropriate femoral cam resection during hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome is both critical for the patient and challenging for the surgeon. Incomplete bone resection is a leading cause of failed hip arthroscopy, whereas over-resection may increase the risk of femoral neck fracture. The alpha angle is a validated 2-dimensional radiographic measurement used to both diagnose femoroacetabular impingement syndrome preoperatively and to determine resection adequacy postoperatively. Computer-assisted intraoperative guidance systems enhance the accuracy of femoral cam resection, although a preoperative 3-dimensional computed tomography scan may be required. Other systems, such as the HipCheck software (Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI), have been developed to provide intraoperative guidance with live feedback using simultaneous alpha angle measurements overlayed on fluoroscopic images without the requirement for routine preoperative computed tomography. Via intraoperative touchscreen navigation, the surgeon identifies the midpoint of the femoral neck and femoral head. A commercial software program provides real-time alpha angle measurements, as well as enhanced visualization of the femoral cam deformity with an adjustable resection curve. Before the surgeon performs the cam resection, the software provides a template for appropriate resection depth in 6 positions of the hip. Upon completion of the femoral cam resection, the hip is again assessed in the same 6 positions and the alpha angle is assessed to ensure a complete resection.

Patients With Lateral and Anterolateral Cam Morphology Have Greater Deformities Versus Typical Anterolateral Deformity Alone but No Differences in Postoperative Outcomes: A Propensity-Matched Analysis at Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To compare pre- and postoperative findings between patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome with lateral impingement versus those without lateral impingement METHODS: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between 2012 and 2017 with minimum 5-year follow-up were included. Alpha angle (AA) was measured on preoperative anteroposterior (AP) and 90° Dunn radiographs. Patients with AA >60° on Dunn view but not AP view (no lateral impingement) were propensity matched by sex, age, and body mass index in a 1:3 ratio to patients with AA >60° on both views (lateral impingement). Demographic characteristics, radiographic and intraoperative findings, reoperation rates, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared between groups. Categorical variables were compared using the Fisher exact testing and continuous variable using 2-tailed Student t tests. RESULTS: Sixty patients with lateral impingement (65.0% female, age: 35.3 ± 13.0 years) were matched to 180 patients without lateral impingement (65.0% female, age: 34.7 ± 12.5 years, P ≥ .279). Patients with lateral impingement had larger preoperative AAs on both Dunn (71.0° ± 8.8° vs 67.6° ± 6.1°, P = .001) and AP radiographs (79.0° ± 12.1° vs 48.2° ± 6.5°, P < .001). However, there were no differences in postoperative AAs on either view (Dunn: 39.0° ± 6.1° vs 40.5° ± 5.3°, AP: 45.8° ± 9.0° vs 44.9° ± 7.0°, P ≥ .074). Labral tears began more superiorly in patients with lateral impingement (12:00 ± 0:49 vs 12:17 ± 0:41, P = .030), and they demonstrated greater rates of acetabular and femoral cartilage damage (P = .030 for both); however, there were no differences in PROs or reoperation rates between the groups at 5-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although cam deformities located laterally and anterolaterally are larger than those located anterolaterally alone, both can be resected adequately, resulting in similar postoperative radiographic measurements, PROs, and survivorship. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Capsular Management at the Time of Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Varies With Geography and Surgeon Subspecialty Training: A Cross-Sectional, Multinational Surgeon Survey.

PURPOSE: To perform a multinational survey and identify patterns in capsular management at the time of hip arthroscopy. METHODS: An anonymous, nonvalidated survey was distributed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine; Arthroscopy Association of North America; European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery & Arthroscopy; International Society for Hip Arthroscopy; and Turkish Society of Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, and Knee Surgery. The questions were broken down into 6 categories: demographic characteristics, capsulotomy preference, traction stitches, capsular closure, postoperative rehabilitation, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 157 surgeons. Surgeons who performed half or full T-type capsulotomies had 2.4 higher odds of using traction sutures for managing both the peripheral and central compartments during hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (P = .024). Surgeons who believed that there was sufficient literature regarding the importance of hip capsular closure had 1.9 higher odds of routinely performing complete closure of the capsule (P = .044). Additionally, surgeons who practiced in the United States had 8.1 higher odds of routinely closing the capsule relative to international surgeons (P < .001). Moreover, surgeons who received hip arthroscopy training in residency or fellowship had 2.4 higher odds of closing the capsule completely compared with surgeons who did not have exposure to hip arthroscopy during their training (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Geographic and surgeon-related variables correlate with capsular management preferences during hip arthroscopy. Surgeons who perform half or full T-capsulotomies more often use traction stitches for managing both the peripheral and central compartments. Surgeons performing routine capsular closure are more likely to believe that sufficient evidence is available to support the practice, with surgeons in the United States being more likely to perform routine capsular closure in comparison to their international colleagues. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As the field of hip preservation continues to evolve, capsular management will likely continue to play an important role in access, instrumentation, and postoperative outcomes.

Outcomes of Isolated Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair Compared With Concomitant Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair and Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair: A Propensity-Matched Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

Background: Both gluteal and labral tears are common sources of hip pain, but no studies have evaluated how concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) affect outcomes after endoscopic gluteus/minimus repair. Purpose: (1) To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinically significant outcomes achievements between patients who underwent endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus and arthroscopic hip labral repair with correction of FAIS versus endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair and (2) to define threshold scores required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool, and visual analog scale for pain in these patients. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent primary endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair between 2012 and 2020 were identified. Those who underwent concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of FAIS with femoroplasty or acetabuloplasty as indicated were propensity matched in a 1 to 1 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index to patients who underwent gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair. Patients who completed the study PROs were assessed preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Threshold scores required to achieve the MCID and PASS thresholds were calculated. Results: A total of 32 patients who underwent simultaneous gluteal and labral repair (G+L) were matched to 32 patients who underwent gluteal repair without labral repair (G); 75% of patients in the G cohort underwent labral debridement, while 25% in this cohort received no labral treatment. A significant difference was observed between groups in preoperative mHHS scores (G+L, 54.4 ± 12.9 vs G, 46.3 ± 14; P = .048) but no differences in any other PRO scores (P≥ .207). The MCID/PASS thresholds were as follows: Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (11.14/83.82), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (16.07/59.72), mHHS (11.47/70.95), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (13.73/45.49), and visual analog scale for pain (14.30/22). There were no significant differences in MCID or PASS achievement rates between the 2 groups (P≥ .108). Conclusion: Patients who underwent combined G+L demonstrated comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes achievement rates to patients who underwent G, highlighting sustained successful outcomes for patients with gluteal tendon pathology and concomitant FAIS and labral tears.

Hip and Pelvis Movement Patterns in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Differ From Controls and Change After Hip Arthroscopy During a Step-Down Pivot-Turn Task.

Background: Alterations in hip kinematics during functional tasks occur in positions that cause anterior impingement in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome. However, tasks that do not promote motions of symptomatic hip impingement remain understudied. Purpose: To compare movement patterns of the hip and pelvis during a step-down pivot-turn task between patients with FAI and controls as well as in patients with FAI before and after hip arthroscopy. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Three-dimensional motion capture was acquired in 32 patients with FAI and 27 controls during a step-down pivot-turn task. An FAI subsample (n = 14) completed testing 9.2 ± 2.0 months (mean ± SD; range, 5.8-13.1 months) after hip arthroscopy. Statistical parametric mapping analysis was used to analyze hip and pelvis time series waveforms (1) between the FAI and control groups, (2) in the FAI group before versus after hip arthroscopy, and (3) in the FAI group after hip arthroscopy versus the control group. Continuous parametric variables were analyzed by paired t test and nonparametric variables by chi-square test. Results: There were no significant differences in demographics between the FAI and control groups. Before hip arthroscopy, patients with FAI demonstrated reduced hip flexion (P = .041) and external rotation (P = .027), as well as decreased anterior pelvic tilt (P = .049) and forward rotation (P = .043), when compared with controls. After hip arthroscopy, patients demonstrated greater hip flexion (P < .001) and external rotation of the operative hip (P < .001), in addition to increased anterior pelvic tilt (P≤ .036) and pelvic rise (P≤ .049), as compared with preoperative values. Postoperatively, the FAI group demonstrated greater hip flexion (P≤ .047) and lower forward pelvic rotation (P = .003) as compared with the control group. Conclusion: Movement pattern differences between the FAI and control groups during the nonimpingement-related step-down pivot-turn task were characterized by differences in the sagittal and transverse planes of the hip and pelvis. After hip arthroscopy, patients exhibited greater hip flexion and external rotation and increased pelvic anterior tilt and pelvic rise as compared with presurgery. When compared with controls, patients with FAI demonstrated greater hip flexion and lower pelvic forward rotation postoperatively. Clinical Relevance: These findings indicate that hip and pelvis biomechanics are altered even during tasks that do not reproduce the anterior impingement position.

Labral Augmentation With Either Iliotibial Band Allograft or Dermis Allograft Perform Similarly Regarding Peak Force, Displacement, and Work to Labral Repair in Suction Seal Restoration: A Biomechanical Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether allograft substitutes may be used to restore suctional seal properties with labral augmentation, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of the labral suction seal under several scenarios, including: (1) intact labrum, (2) rim preparation, (3) labral repair, (4) labral augmentation with iliotibial band (ITB), and (5) labral augmentation with a dermis allograft. METHODS: Eleven hemi-pelvises were dissected to the level of the labrum and placed in a material testing system for biomechanical axial distraction. Each specimen was compressed to 250 newtons (N) and distracted at 10 mm/s while load, crosshead displacement, and time were continuously recorded. For each of the 5 labral states, 3 testing repetitions were performed. Peak force (N, newtons), displacement at peak force (mm, millimeter), and work (N-mm, newton, millimeter) were calculated and normalized to the intact state of each specimen. RESULTS: Eleven specimens were tested and 8 specimens (age: 58.6 ± 5.4 years, body mass index: 28.6 ± 6.8 kg/m2; 4 female patients; 5 right hips) were included in final analyses. Expressed as a percentage relative to the intact state, the average normalized peak force, displacement at peak force, and work for each labral state were as follows: intact (100.0% ± 0% for all), rim preparation (89.0% ± 9.2%, 93.3% ± 20.6%, 85.1% ± 9.0%), repair (61.3% ± 17.9%, 88.4% ± 36.9%, 58.1% ± 16.7%), ITB allograft (62.7% ± 24.9%, 83.9% ± 21.6%, 59.4% ± 22.4%), and dermis allograft (57.8% ± 27.2%, 88.2% ± 29.5%, 50.0% ± 20.1%). Regarding peak force, intact state was significantly greater compared with the labral repair, augmentation with ITB, and augmentation with the dermis allograft states (P < .001). No significant differences were demonstrated between displacement at peak force (P = .561). Regarding work, both intact state and rim preparation states were significantly greater than the repair, ITB augmentation, and dermis allograft augmentation states (P < .001). In all outcome measures, the dermis allograft augmentation performed with no statistical difference to the ITB augmentation state. CONCLUSIONS: Labral repair and labral augmentation with either ITB allograft or the dermis allograft resulted in significantly lower peak force and work to equilibrium compared with the intact and rim prep states. There was no statistical difference between repair and augmentation states as well as no statistical difference between ITB allograft and dermal allograft at time zero. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study compares biomechanical properties of the suction seal of the hip comparing labral states including intact, rim preparation, repair, and augmentation, which can be used for surgical decision-making.

The Promising 2-Year Performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System in Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds have been previously defined for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) at 1-year follow-up in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome; however, the MCID and PASS thresholds are yet to be defined for the PROMIS at 2-year follow-up. PURPOSE: (1) To establish MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) and PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) at 2-year follow-up and (2) to correlate PROMIS scores with hip-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between August and November 2020 with preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative data were identified. Collected scores included those for the PROMIS-PI, PROMIS-PF, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. MCID thresholds were calculated using the distribution-based method and PASS thresholds using the anchor-based method. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compare scores between PROMs. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients met the criteria for inclusion (72.3% female; mean age, 36.9 ± 13.5 years; mean body mass index, 26.2 ± 6.0). The mean follow-up was 25.3 ± 3.3 months. Significant preoperative to postoperative improvements were observed for all PROMs (P < .001). MCID thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 10.1 and 75%, respectively; HOS-SS, 13.8 and 79%, respectively; iHOT-12, 14.0 and 67%, respectively; VAS pain, -13.8 and 78%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, -4.7 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 5.8 and 60%, respectively. PASS thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 78.7 and 67%, respectively; HOS-SS, 76.4 and 62%, respectively; iHOT-12, 67.4 and 60%, respectively; VAS pain, 25.5 and 61%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, 57.0 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 45.6 and 58%, respectively. PROMIS-PI scores correlated most strongly with HOS-ADL (r = -0.836), HOS-SS (r = -0.767), and iHOT-12 (r = -0.719) scores and exhibited at least moderate correlations (r≥-0.595) with the other PROM scores. PROMIS-PF demonstrated moderate correlations with all the other PROM scores (r≥-0.586). Strong correlations were seen between the hip-specific PROM scores (r≥-0.745). CONCLUSION: This study defined 2-year MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PF and demonstrated moderate to strong correlations between PROMIS scores and hip-specific PROM scores.

Machine learning-based prediction of hip joint moment in healthy subjects, patients and post-operative subjects.

The application of machine learning in the field of motion capture research is growing rapidly. The purpose of the study is to implement a long-short term memory (LSTM) model able to predict sagittal plane hip joint moment (HJM) across three distinct cohorts (healthy controls, patients and post-operative patients) starting from 3D motion capture and force data. Statistical parametric mapping with paired samples t-test was performed to compare machine learning and inverse dynamics HJM predicted values, with the latter used as gold standard. The results demonstrated favorable model performance on each of the three cohorts, showcasing its ability to successfully generalize predictions across diverse cohorts.

Cartilage Defects Are Negatively Associated With Long-Term Hip Survivorship Following Contemporary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis at Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To identify the timing and risk factors associated with secondary surgery following primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) at 10-year minimum follow-up. METHODS: A prospectively collected clinical repository was evaluated for cases of primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS between January 2012 and February 2013 with minimum 10-year follow-up. Patients who underwent secondary surgery were propensity matched 1:4 to patients who did not undergo secondary surgery, controlling for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). The groups were compared on demographics, radiographs, intraoperative findings, operative procedures, and patient-reported outcomes. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship curve was generated. Among the reoperation-free survivors, minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) achievement were recorded for Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (HOS-SS) subscales, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain). RESULTS: Twenty-four reoperation patients (67% female; age 40.1 ± 14.3 years; BMI 27.2 ± 5.5) were matched to 96 reoperation-free patients (62% female; age 37.0 ± 10.8 years; BMI 25.2 ± 4.7, P ≥ .111). Mean follow-up was 10.3 ± 0.2 years. No preoperative demographic differences were found between groups. The reoperation group showed more high-grade cartilage defects on the acetabulum and femoral head (33% vs 8%, P = .004; 29% vs 7%, P = .007). A bimodal distribution of time to reoperation was evidenced independent of the secondary surgery performed. Among the reoperation-free survivors, MCID and PASS achievement was as follows: HOS-ADL (69.1%, 62.1%), HOS-SS (69.9%, 74.4%), mHHS (73.3%, 58.1%), iHOT-12 (n/a, 63.8%), and VAS-Pain (80.2%, 62.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients requiring reoperation following primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS demonstrated more severe cartilage defects and a bimodal distribution of time to reoperation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative case series.

Patients Aged 40 Years and Older Demonstrate Durable and Comparable Results to Patients Aged Less Than 40 Years After Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Propensity Matched Study at Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to compare clinical outcomes and rates of secondary surgery, including revision hip arthroscopy and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), after primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients ≥40 years of age at minimum 10-year follow-up compared with a propensity-matched control group of patients <40 years. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed for patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS between January 2012 and February 2013. Patients ≥40 years old were propensity matched in a 1:1 ratio by sex and body mass index to patients <40 years old. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including Hip Outcome Score for Activities of Daily Living and Sports-Specific subscales, modified Harris Hip, International Hip Outcome Tool-12, and Visual Analog Scale for Pain and Satisfaction were collected. Rates of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) achievement at 10 years were evaluated and compared between groups. Rates of secondary surgery including revision hip arthroscopy and conversion to THA were evaluated. Gross survivorship between cohorts was evaluated using a Kaplan-Meier curve. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients aged ≥40 (age 48.3 ± 5.8 years) were successfully matched to 53 patients aged <40 (age: 28.9 ± 7.2, <0.001). There were no other preoperative group differences regarding patient demographics, characteristics, or radiographic findings. Both groups demonstrated significant improvement regarding all PROs at a minimum of 10 years' follow-up (P < .001 for all). No significant difference was noted between cohorts regarding any delta (preoperative to 10-year postoperative) scores (P > .05 for all). High rates of MCID and PASS achievement were achieved in both cohorts, with no significant differences in any PRO measure (P > .05 for all). No significant differences in rates of complications (age ≥40: 2.0%, age <40: 7.7%, P = .363), rates of revision (age ≥40: 7.5%, age <40: 9.4%, P = .999), or conversion to THA (age ≥40: 13.2%, age <40: 3.8%, P = .161) were identified. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, no significant difference (P = .321) was demonstrated in overall gross survivorship between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Patients with age ≥40 with FAIS undergoing primary hip arthroscopy demonstrated durable and comparable 10-year PRO and rates of MCID and PASS achievement compared with a propensity-matched cohort of age <40 counterparts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative prognostic trial.