Capsular closure versus unrepaired interportal capsulotomy after hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement: results of a patient-blinded randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hip capsular management after hip arthroscopy remains a topic of debate. Most available current literature is of poor quality and are retrospective or cohort studies. As of today, no clear consensus exists on capsular management after hip arthroscopy. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of routine capsular closure versus unrepaired capsulotomy after interportal capsulotomy measured with NRS pain and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All eligible patients with femoroacetabular impingement who opt for hip arthroscopy (n = 116) were randomly assigned to one of both treatment groups and were operated by a single surgeon. Postoperative pain was measured with the NRS score weekly the first 12 weeks after surgery. The HAGOS questionnaire was measured at 12 and 52 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and operation details were comparable between treatment groups. Regarding the NRS pain no significant difference was found between groups at any point the first 12 weeks after surgery (p = 0.67). Both groups significantly improved after surgery (p < 0.001). After 3 months follow-up there were no differences between groups for the HAGOS questionnaire except for the domain sport (p = 0.02) in favour of the control group. After 12 months follow-up there were no differences between both treatment groups on all HAGOS domains (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this randomised controlled trial show highest possible evidence that there is no reason for routinely capsular closure after interportal capsulotomy at the end of hip arthroscopy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at the CCMO Dutch Trial Register: NL55669.048.15.

Influence of Preoperative Tibiotalar Alignment in the Coronal Plane on the Survival of Total Ankle Replacement: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: It remains controversial whether significant preoperative tibiotalar varus and valgus deformity should be contraindications for total ankle replacement (TAR). The primary aim of this systematic review was to analyze the influence of preoperative tibiotalar varus and valgus alignment on the survival of TAR. METHODS: The databases MEDLINE and Embase were searched from onset through September 2018. Two authors performed study selection and data extraction using a predefined data extraction tool. Implant survival in the alignment groups was reported as "revisions per 100 component years." Additional procedures, complications, and revisions were also reported. Assessment of the methodological quality was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). RESULTS: In total, 17 studies were considered eligible, in which a total of 1692 TARs were included from 1627 patients. The weighted mean follow-up was 52.4 (range, 1-147) months. The neutral alignment group included 711 TARs, the varus group included 545 TARs, and the valgus group included 332 TARs. Total revisions were 52, 37, and 36 in the preoperative tibiotalar neutral, varus, and valgus alignment groups, respectively. Revisions per 100 observed component years were 1.6, 1.7, and 2.5 in the preoperative tibiotalar neutral, varus, and valgus alignment groups, respectively. A total of 129 complications and 447 additional procedures were reported in 601 TARs. CONCLUSION: There was a strong indication that preoperative varus alignment in the coronal plane had a comparable implant survival to neutral alignment. Preoperative valgus alignment demonstrated a more negative influence on implant survival. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review.