Pudendal nerve injury is a relatively common but transient complication of hip arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: Hip arthroscopy is emerging as the standard of care for conditions involving the hip, and has a unique set of complications. The purpose of this review was to identify (1) the crude rate of pudendal nerve injury following hip arthroscopy and (2) the specific factors leading to pudendal nerve injury. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched from database inception to October 2016. Patient demographics, indications, surgical technique, complication rates, treatment approaches, and rehabilitation strategies were extracted. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies (n = 3405) were included, with the majority (66%) of studies being level IV evidence. The mean age was 33.9 ± 9.7 years (range 12-78) and 48.2% were males. Average follow-up was 30.2 ± 19.1 months. 62 patients were reported to have sustained pudendal nerve injury (1.8%) post-operatively, and all resolved within 6 weeks to 3 months. Of the seven studies that reported using a perineal post, 20 patients were diagnosed with pudendal nerve injury (4.3%), in contrast to two studies (189 patients) reporting only 0.5% pudendal nerve injury without the use of perineal post. Two studies commented on time of traction during surgical intervention with mean times of 98 and 68 min with complication rates of 10% and 6.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pudendal nerve injury is not uncommon following hip arthroscopy, with a reported rate found in this review of 1.8%. Potential risk factors may include the use of a perineal post and long traction times. All reported cases resolved within 3 months. Patients should be informed of complications related to pudendal nerve injury, which include sexual and urinary dysfunction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of level I-IV studies.

Venous Thromboembolism Events After Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic literature review focused on hip arthroscopy was to (1) report the venous thromboembolism (VTE) event incidence in patients who receive VTE prophylaxis and those who do not, (2) report how VTE prophylaxis is currently being administered, and (3) report operative and patient-related risk factors for VTE identified in the literature. METHODS: The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed were searched from database inception to October 10, 2016, and screened in duplicate for relevant studies. Data were collected regarding VTE prophylaxis, traction use, surgical time, VTE incidence, patient and operative factors, and postoperative weight bearing and rehabilitation. Study quality was assessed in duplicate with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. RESULTS: Outcome analyses included 14 studies that involved 2,850 patients (2,985 hips). The weighted mean follow-up period was 19 ± 8 months, ranging from 7 days to 103 months. The weighted mean age was 40.7 ± 7 years, ranging from 6 to 82 years, and 39.6% of patients were male patients. The overall weighted proportion of VTE events after hip arthroscopy found in 14 included studies was 2.0% (95% confidence interval, 0.01%-4.1%), with 25 VTE events. Several studies reported patient risk factors, which included increased age, increased body mass index, prolonged traction time, and use of oral contraceptives. CONCLUSIONS: The use and efficacy of VTE prophylaxis are highly under-reported within hip arthroscopy. The low incidence of VTE events found in this review (2.0%) suggests that prophylaxis may not be necessary in low-risk patients undergoing hip arthroscopy; however, the true rate may be under-reported. Current literature suggests that prophylaxis is typically not prescribed. Early mobility and postoperative rehabilitation may also help to further mitigate the risk of VTE events, but use of these strategies needs further prospective evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II through IV studies.

Preoperative physical examination and imaging of femoroacetabular impingement prior to hip arthroscopy-a systematic review.

The purpose of this systematic review is to report current preoperative assessment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) including physical examination and imaging modalities prior to hip arthroscopy, and report current imaging measures used in the diagnosis of FAI. The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed were searched and screened in duplicate for relevant studies. Data regarding patient demographics, non-operative treatment, preoperative assessment including physical examination and imaging prior to hip arthroscopy were abstracted. Study quality was assessed in duplicate using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Sixty-eight studies of fair quality evidence that involved a total of 5125 patients (5400 hips) were included. In total, 56% of all patients were male and mean age was 36 years (SD ± 10.0). Within physical examination, FADIR impingement testing was reported in 57% of patients. All included studies reported plain radiographic imaging as a component of preoperative assessment with anterior-posterior pelvis view being the most commonly reported view, followed by the cross-table lateral and Dunn views. Magnetic resonance imaging was obtained for 52% of included patients and computed tomography for 26% of patients. The most commonly reported measure within imaging for the diagnosis of cam type impingement was alpha angle (66%), whereas for pincer type impingement, the cross-over sign (48%) was most reported. Preoperative assessment is underreported in the FAI literature. Improved reporting is warranted to develop a more consistent and validated diagnostic algorithm for FAI to enhance patient selection. Level of evidence: Level IV, Systematic Review of Level I-IV Studies.

Hip arthroscopic capsulotomy techniques and capsular management strategies: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Hip arthroscopy is increasingly used to address hip joint pathology. Iatrogenic instability has been reported as a potential complication, leading to the evaluation of various capsular management strategies. The purpose of this review was to (1) report the techniques used for capsulotomy in hip arthroscopy, (2) understand techniques and indications for capsular closure, and (3) report outcomes based on capsular management strategy. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched and screened in duplicate for relevant studies. Data regarding patient demographics, indications, surgical technique, rehabilitation strategies, and complication rates were obtained. Study quality was assessed in duplicate using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) Criteria. RESULTS: Eighty-two studies of primarily level IV evidence (80 %) and of fair quality involving 4504 patients with a mean age of 35 years old (range 1.2-82 years) were included. Fifty percent of patients were male. Mean follow-up was 24.9 months (range 5 days to 13 years). Of 68 studies reporting capsulotomy technique (only 7 % of all otherwise eligible studies), 55 % performed an interportal capsulotomy while 24 % performed a T-capsulotomy. Of 36 studies reporting capsular management strategy post-arthroscopy, 22 % did not repair the capsulotomy, 6 % routinely performed partial repair, and 50 % performed complete repair. Of three studies (206 patients) directly comparing capsular management strategies, only one study found a statistically significant difference between complete and partial repair on the Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale, though this difference was less than the minimal clinically important difference (83.6 versus 87.3). The total rate of reported post-operative dislocation, instability, or instability was 0.3 % (5 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Technical details regarding capsulotomy and capsular management post-hip arthroscopy are not consistently reported in the literature. Capsulotomies are most often performed using an interportal technique, and more recent studies report routine closure. Overall, post-operative instability is rare and there is no consistent trend for capsular management strategy. Given current evidence, there is little basis on which to establish the relationship between surgical technique and post-operative instability or long-term consequences (e.g., kinematic changes). Thus, while capsular closure/plication may be suitable for specific populations (i.e., dysplasia or laxity), evidence-based indications for capsular repair remain unclear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of level I-IV Studies.

Fluid Extravasation in Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to (1) characterize cases of fluid extravasation during hip arthroscopy and explore common factors among them and (2) describe management strategies and outcomes of this complication. METHODS: The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched and screened in duplicate. Data regarding patient demographics, fluid management, presentation, management, and outcomes were collected. Study quality was assessed in duplicate using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies Criteria. RESULTS: Fourteen studies (1,286 patients) were included. Twenty-two occurrences of symptomatic fluid extravasation were reported in 21 patients (1.6% of total patients; one patient had fluid extravasation during 2 separate hip arthroscopies). Two studies of normal fluid extravasation in asymptomatic patients reported 1.13 to 3.06 L of extravasated fluid observed on computed tomography. Nine case studies were included, which provided detailed patient and surgical information. Of these 9 patients (10 cases) with a mean age of 38.2 years old (range, 15 to 55 years), 6 were female. Signs of fluid extravasation included abdominal distension (89%), hypothermia (56%), hypotension. and metabolic acidosis (33% each). Four patients required surgical intervention, while 3 underwent paracentesis. Two patients were managed conservatively. All patients stabilized and were discharged, with one patient reporting abdominal complaints at latest follow-up (length of follow-up unspecified). CONCLUSIONS: Fluid extravasation is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication of hip arthroscopy. It is important for surgeons and anaesthesiologists to be aware of its existence in order to recognize and manage it promptly. Most patients require interventional management by surgery or paracentesis, but some stabilize with conservative management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.

Return to Work and Sport Following High Tibial Osteotomy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine (1) timelines for return to sport and work following high tibial osteotomy (HTO), and (2) whether patients return to sport and work at levels similar to preoperative levels. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across 3 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed). Two reviewers independently screened the results for relevant articles. Data regarding patient demographics, indications, surgical technique, return to work and sport, and complication and failure rates were abstracted from eligible studies. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included, involving 1,189 patients (64% male, 21% female, 15% unspecified) and 1,224 knees. Mean age was 46.2 years (range, 16 to 80 years). Opening-wedge HTO was most commonly used, followed by closing-wedge HTO and hemicallotasis. Mean follow-up was 65.4 months (range, 8 to 253 months). Overall, 87.2% of patients returned to sport postoperatively, and 78.6% returned at an equal or greater level. Among competitive athletes, 54% returned to competition. Overall, 84.5% of patients returned to work postoperatively, and 65.5% returned at an equal or greater level. Approximately 90% of patients who returned to work or sport did so within 1 year. The complication rate was 5.8%, with infection being the most common complication; 7.0% of patients progressed to a total knee arthroplasty at a mean of 6.7 years (range, 0.8 to 15 years) following HTO. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients undergoing HTO return to sport and work, and most return within 1 year of the operation. Most patients return to sport at a level equal to or greater than the preoperative level. Approximately two-thirds of patients return to an equal or greater level of physical work. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.