Comparison of 3D Computer Assisted Planning With and Without Patient Specific Instrumentation for Severe Bone Defects in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative planning is an integral aspect of managing complex deformity in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The purpose of this study was to compare the success of patient specific instrumentation (PSI) and 3D computer-assisted planning with standard instrumentation (Non-PSI) in achieving planned corrections of the glenoid among patients undergoing RSA with severe bony deformity requiring glenoid bone grafts. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was performed, including all patients that underwent RSA with combined bone grafting procedures (BIO-RSA or structural bone grafting) for severe glenoid deformity by a single between June 2016 and July 2023. Patients were required to have preoperative and postoperative CT scans as well as preoperative 3D planning performed for inclusion. Patients were divided into two groups based on the use of 3D computer-assisted planning with or without PSI (PSI vs. Non-PSI). The corrected inclination and version were measured by two separate reviewers on preoperative and postoperative 2D CT scans and compared to their corresponding preoperative planning goals utilizing bivariate analyses. RESULTS: We identified 45 patients that met our inclusion criteria (22 PSI and 23 Non-PSI). Preoperative inclination (mean ± SD) (PSI 10.12° ± 15.86°, Non-PSI 9.43° ± 10.64°; P = 0.864) and version (PSI -18.78° ± 18.3°, Non-PSI -17.82° ± 11.49°; P = 0.835) measurements were similar between groups. No significant differences in the mean deviation (error) between the postoperative and planned inclination (PSI 5.49° ± 3.72; Non-PSI 6.91° ± 5.05; P = 0.437) and version (PSI 8.37° ± 5.7; Non-PSI 5.37° ± 4.43; P = 0.054) were found between groups. No difference in the rate of outliers (>10° error) was noted in inclination (P = 0.135) or version (P = 0.445) between groups. Greater planned version correction was correlated with greater error when PSI was utilized (PSI r = 0.519, P = 0.013; Non-PSI r = 0.362, P = 0.089). CONCLUSION: Both PSI and 3D computer-assisted planning without PSI (Non-PSI) appear to be useful techniques to achieve version and inclination correction among patients undergoing RSA with severe glenoid deformity required glenoid bone grafting with no clear superiority of one method over the other. Surgeons should be aware that when utilizing PSI, slightly greater error in achieving version goals may occur as version correction is increased.

Cultural Competence and the Postoperative Experience: Pain Control and Rehabilitation.

Healthcare inequities exist across healthcare and have been shown to influence patient care and outcomes. In the field of orthopaedic surgery, healthcare disparities have been shown to manifest in the realms of postoperative pain management and rehabilitation. Previous literature has demonstrated that socioeconomic status, sex, gender, race, and ethnicity influence postoperative pain management and can precipitate a negative patient experience, manifesting as poorly managed pain and undertreatment of minorities and patients of lower socioeconomic status. A similar body of literature has revealed similar barriers in postoperative rehabilitation, particularly with regard to accessibility, language, rapport, and culture. These disparities impact patients, ranging from diminished surgical satisfaction to postoperative morbidity. As the United States becomes increasingly diverse, cultural competence plays a major role in combating these disparities. This article presents methods to promote cultural competence, including greater diversity in the medical field, a greater emphasis on cultural competency in education and training programs at all levels of healthcare, increased resources allocated to researching healthcare inequities, and more effective mechanisms of patient education.

Hip Arthroscopy Results in Similar Short-Term Function Compared to Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients of Similar Demographic Profiles.

Purpose: To review short-term functional outcomes in patients who underwent hip arthroscopy and to compare their outcomes to those of a demographically similar cohort who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (SCOPE) between April 2008 and October 2015. SCOPE patients were included if they were ≥35 years, had preoperative and postoperative 2-year follow-up, and had no prior hip condition or ipsilateral hip surgery. SCOPE patients were matched 1:1 to a demographically similar cohort of patients who underwent THA at our institution. Matching criteria included similar age (within 5 years), gender, and body mass index (within 5). SCOPE patients were assessed with modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), non-arthritic hip score, and visual analogue scale (VAS). THA patients were assessed with mHHS, forgotten joint score, and VAS. Results: Sixty-seven patients were included in each cohort. Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for management of labral tears achieved nearly equivalent mHHS, Health Survey Short Form (SF-12) Mental, SF-12 Physical, Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey (VR-12) Mental, VR-12 Physical scores at latest follow-up compared to demographically similar patients who underwent THA. There was no significant difference in mHHS scores (SCOPE = 82.9 ± 16.4 vs THA = 87.3 ± 15, P = .095) between the 2 group groups. In addition, average patient satisfaction on a 10-point scale was 8.1 for the SCOPE cohort and 8.8 for the THA cohort (P = .052). Conclusions: Our results show that hip arthroscopy, when performed in patients with the appropriate indications, can lead to comparably excellent outcomes as total hip arthroplasty with significant pain relief at short term follow-up. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Intra-articular Damage and Patient Outcome Comparison Between Athletes and Nonathletes After Hip Arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: The body of literature comparing hip arthroscopy between athletes and nonathletes is relatively scarce. Analyzing these groups can help to shed light on the severity of intra-articular damage and end-stage osteoarthritis that may result from participation in strenuous activities. PURPOSE: (1) To compare the intra-articular damage at the time of hip arthroscopy between athletes and nonathletes, and (2) to compare the pre- and postoperative outcomes between the groups. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients were considered eligible for analysis if they had received a primary hip arthroscopy between August 2008 and June 2018, were participating in competitive athletics, and had preoperative baseline scores and minimum 2-year follow-up for the following patient-reported outcomes: modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale. Propensity score matching was used to match eligible patients in a 1:1 ratio to patients who were not participating in any sports greater than a recreational level before surgery. RESULTS: A total of 234 patients were included. There were no significant differences in the severity of labral tears, ligamentum teres tears, or cartilage damage (P > .05). The procedures performed between cohorts were similar (P > .05). The athlete population had higher preoperative means scores for the modified Harris Hip Score and NAHS (each P < .001). Likewise, the athlete population had higher postoperative means scores for the NAHS, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale (P = .031, P = .030, and P = .032, respectively). Additionally, the athlete cohort reported higher minimum 2-year outcomes than the nonathlete cohort for the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (mental component; P = .003) and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (mental component, P = .032; physical component, P = .005). CONCLUSION: At the time of hip arthroscopy, athletes demonstrate similar intra-articular damage to their nonathlete counterparts. Given their higher preoperative scores, it is possible that athletes better tolerate the damage to the hip joint. Despite their strenuous activities and potentially higher tolerance to pain, athletes should not necessarily be expected to have greater severity of intra-articular pathology.

The Inverse Relationship Between Labral Size and Acetabular Coverage: Does It Protect the Cartilage in the Dysplastic Hip?

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to confirm the relationship between osseous coverage and labral size and to investigate the severity of intra-articular damage in borderline dysplastic hips in correlation to labral size. METHODS: Patients treated with primary hip arthroscopy for symptomatic labral tears between 2010 and 2018 were considered for this study. Patients were included if they had preoperative radiographic measures and intraoperative assessments of the labra and cartilage. The study group was divided into borderline dysplastic and nondysplastic groups via 3 measurements: lateral center edge angle (LCEA), acetabular index (Ax), and anterior center edge angle (ACEA). Undercoverage was defined as LCEA ≤ 25°, Ax ≥ 10°, and ACEA ≤ 20°. The labrum was measured in four quadrants: anterosuperior (AS), anteroinferior (AI), posterosuperior (PS), and posteroinferior (PI). Additionally, to assess cartilage damage in borderline dysplastic hips, hips with average labral size in the top quartile were compared to hips with average labral size in the bottom quartile. RESULTS: A total of 1765 hips (1589 patients) were included in the study. The mean LCEA, Ax, and ACEA between the borderline dysplastic and nondysplastic groups were significantly different (P < .001). According to the Ax classification, there was significant evidence that borderline dysplastic hips had larger labra (P < .05). Among the dysplastic group, there was significantly more cartilage damage according to the Outerbridge classifications along both the acetabulum and femoral head in hips with labra in the upper quartile (P =.011 and .005, respectively). CONCLUSION: An inverse relationship may exist between acetabular depth and labral size. Additionally, specifically in borderline dysplastic hips, a relatively large labrum correlates with worse intra-articular damage compared to borderline dysplastic hips with a relatively small labrum. Larger labral size may indicate a higher degree of instability in patients with borderline dysplasia. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control study.

Efficacy of NSAIDs versus radiotherapy for heterotopic ossification prophylaxis following total hip arthroplasty in high-risk patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this systematic review were: (1) to investigate the prophylactic effect of radiotherapy (RT) and NSAIDs in high-risk patients following total hip arthroplasty (THA); and (2) to compare the efficacy of non-selective and COX-II selective NSAIDs in preventing post-THA HO, utilising a meta-analysis of randomised control studies. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Databases were searched for articles regarding HO following THA in March 2019. Studies were included if they contained data regarding HO incidence after THA or contained data regarding HO prophylaxis comparison of NSAIDs and/or RT in terms of dosage or duration. RESULTS: 24 studies reported on populations that were not at high-risk for HO. These studies reported between 47.3% and 90.4% of their patient populations had no HO formation; between 2.8% and 52.7% had mild formation; and between 0.0% and 10.4% had severe formation. A total of 13 studies reported on populations at high-risk for HO. Studies analysing RT in high-risk patients reported between 28.6% and 97.4% of patients developed no HO formation; between 1.9% and 66.7% developed mild HO formation; and between 0.0% and 11.9% developed severe HO formation. Studies analysing NSAID treatment among high-risk populations reported between 76.6% and 88.9% had no HO formation; between 11.1% and 23.4% had mild HO formation, and between 0.0% and 1.8% had severe HO formation. 9 studies were identified as randomised control trials and subsequently used for meta-analysis. The relative risk for COX-II in developing any HO after THA was not significantly different compared to non-selective NSAIDs (RR 1.00; CI, 0.801-1.256; p = 0.489). CONCLUSIONS: NSAIDs prophylaxis for HO may have better efficacy than RT in high-risk patients following THA. Non-selective and COX-II selective NSAIDs have comparable efficacy in preventing HO. Factors such as medical comorbidities and side-effect profile should dictate the prophylaxis recommendation.

Pertrochanteric Calcifications in Patients With Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome: Description, Prevalence, and Correlation With Intraoperatively Diagnosed Hip Abductor Tendon Injuries.

BACKGROUND: Pertrochanteric calcifications can be found in patients with greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS). A systematic description of the types and prevalence of these calcifications has not been undertaken. Furthermore, there is conflicting evidence regarding their association with abductor tendon injuries. PURPOSE: (1) To describe the various types and prevalence of pertrochanteric calcifications in patients presenting for the surgical management of recalcitrant GTPS. (2) To evaluate the association of the various calcifications with intraoperatively diagnosed hip abductor tendon injuries, including tendinosis, partial-thickness tears, and full-thickness tears. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgical management for GTPS, in isolation or as an ancillary procedure during hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement, between April 2008 and February 2020 were included. Of these, 85 procedures were isolated treatment of GTPS and the remaining 628 were ancillary to hip arthroscopy. Radiographs were scrutinized for the presence of pertrochanteric calcifications. The hip abductor tendon status was intraoperatively classified as intact, partial-thickness tear, or full-thickness tear. The prevalence and correlation of the various radiographic findings in relation to the intraoperatively classified tendon condition were analyzed via the odds ratio (OR). RESULTS: Surgery was performed on 713 hips with recalcitrant GTPS. No tear was found in 340 hips (47.7%), 289 hips (40.5%) had a partial-thickness tear, and 84 hips (11.8%) had a full-thickness tear. Radiographically, 102 hips (14.3%) demonstrated proximally directed enthesophytes, and 34 (4.8%) had distally directed enthesophytes. In addition, 75 hips (10.5%) had amorphous calcifications, 47 (6.6%) had isolated ossicles, and 110 (15.4%) had surface irregularities. The presence of any calcification was associated with partial-thickness tears (OR, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.21-2.21]; P = .002) and full-thickness tears (OR, 6.40 [95% CI, 3.91-10.47]; P < .001). Distally directed enthesophytes (OR, 10.18 [95% CI, 3.08-33.63]; P < .001) and proximally directed enthesophytes (OR, 8.69 [95% CI, 4.66-16.21]; P < .001) were the findings with the highest OR for the presence of any type of tear. Distally directed enthesophytes were the findings with the highest OR for a full-thickness tear (OR, 15.79 [95% CI, 7.55-33.06]; P < .001). Isolated ossicles were the findings with the highest OR for a partial-thickness tear (OR, 1.73 [95% CI, 0.96-3.13]; P = .070). CONCLUSION: Pertrochanteric calcifications were common radiographic findings in patients with GTPS and can help guide management in these patients. Proximally and distally directed enthesophytes were strong predictors for the presence of a hip abductor tendon tear, and specifically a full-thickness tear, and increasing size of the findings was associated with more severe tendon injuries.

Intraoperative Findings and Clinical Outcomes Associated With Arthroscopic Management of Subspine Impingement: A Propensity-Matched, Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: (1) To investigate intra-articular damage in the hip joint associated with subspine impingement (SSI); (2) to evaluate clinical outcomes of arthroscopic treatment of hips with SSI; and (3) to compare the findings and outcomes to a control group without SSI. METHODS: Eligible patients had arthroscopic treatment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) concurrent with SSI between January 2015 and December 2017. Inclusion criteria consisted of preoperative and minimum 2-year patient-reported outcomes and preoperative measurements for Tönnis, lateral center edge angle, and alpha angle. Included patients were propensity-matched in a 1:3 ratio to patients who had FAI without SSI. Patient-reported outcomes were compared between groups. Minimal clinically important difference was calculated for modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS). RESULTS: Fifty SSI cases were matched to 150 patients who had FAI without SSI. A greater proportion of the SSI cohort required labral reconstruction (P = .010). The size and locations for labral tears and chondral defects were comparable between groups (P > .05). Both groups demonstrated similar minimum 2-year outcomes for mHHS (P = .103), Nonarthritic Hip Score (P = .200), HOS-SSS (P = .119), visual analog scale (P = .231), international Hip Outcome Tool-12 (P =.300), Short Form-12 Mental (P = .426), Short Form-12 Physical (P = .328), Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey, Mental (P = .419), and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey, Physical (P = .316). The percentage of patients achieving minimal clinically important difference for mHHS and HOS-SSS was similar (P > .05). Survivorship was 96.0% and 98.7% for the SSI and control cohorts at 2 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic treatment of hips with SSI with subspine decompression and concomitant treatment of labral tears and FAI yielded significant improvement in patients' outcomes, which compared favorably with the control group. SSI may correlate with more complex labral tears, not amenable to repair, and complete tears of the ligamentum teres. Other findings, such as location and size of intra-articular damage, were similar between the cohorts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, case-control study.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Athletes Following Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement With Subanalysis on Return to Sport and Performance Level: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To identify present trends in demographics, surgical indications, preoperative findings, and surgical treatment of athletes undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement and (2) to investigate the outcomes in this patient population, including patient-reported outcome scores (PROS), return-to-sport, complications, and reoperation data at minimum 2-year follow-up in the athletic population. METHODS: Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed databases were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines to distinguish articles that reported PROS after hip arthroscopy in athletes. Athletes were defined as anyone who played a sport for minimum 2 years at any level. The standardized mean difference was calculated to compare the effect size of hip arthroscopy on various PROS. RESULTS: Eighteen studies, with 904 athlete hips and a collective study period of January 1993 to April 2017, were included in this systematic review. Across all studies, the mean age and body mass index ranged from 15.7-36.7 years and 20.3-26.3, respectively. The follow-up range was 24-240 months. Mean preoperative alpha angle ranged from 57.7° to 80.0°. Athletes most commonly underwent femoroplasty and labral management. At latest follow-up, the modified Harris Hip Score were excellent in 6 studies (range, 92.1-98), good in 10 studies (range, 84.2-88.5), and fair in 1 study (77.1). Each studies' individual athletic cohort showed significant improvement on the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, the Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale, visual analog scale for pain, and International Hip Outcome Tool at latest follow-up (P < .05). The return-to-sport rate ranged from 72.7% to 100%, with 74.2-100% of these athletes returning to preinjury or greater level. CONCLUSIONS: Athletes undergoing arthroscopic hip surgery in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement, not only exhibit significant functional improvement, but also have a high rate of return to sport at the same or greater competition level compared with preinjury level. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Return to Activity After Gluteus Medius Repair in Active Patients Older Than 50 Years.

BACKGROUND: Gluteus medius (GM) tears are a known cause of dysfunction and disability predominantly in older women. PURPOSE: To report on return to activity, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and a uniquely calculated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at a minimum 2-year follow-up for active patients who had undergone either an endoscopic or an open GM repair. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Patients were considered eligible if they (1) underwent a GM repair with or without concomitant central and peripheral compartment procedures; (2) had baseline preoperative and minimum 2-year scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain; and (3) participated in a physical activity or sport within 1 year before their surgery. Return to activity was defined as the patient being able to participate in his or her activity at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 87 eligible patients, 84 (96.6%) met all inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up was at 44.5 months. Six patients (7.1%) underwent an open GM repair, while the remaining 78 (92.9%) underwent an endoscopic GM repair. Concomitant central and peripheral compartment arthroscopic procedures were performed in 69 patients (82.1%). All PROs significantly (P < .001) improved as follows: mHHS, from 59.0 to 85.8; NAHS, from 57.9 to 84.0; HOS-SSS, from 32.6 to 63.7; and VAS pain, from 5.4 to 1.9. A total of 57 patients (67.9%) returned to their preoperative activity at the 2-year follow-up. The MCID was calculated for the mHHS, NAHS, and HOS-SSS to be 7.5, 7.4, and 10.9, respectively, with 79.3%, 86.4%, and 70.2% of patients achieving the MCID for each respective PROs. CONCLUSION: Active patients over the age of 50 years may benefit from endoscopic or open repair of GM tears, as the majority of patients in our cohort were able to return to their activity of choice. All measured PROs had significantly improved at a minimum 2-year follow-up, with high survivorship, satisfaction, and clinical effectiveness. Patients with partial-thickness tears compared with full-thickness tears and those who underwent isolated GM repair compared with GM repair with concomitant procedures had similar return to activity rates and PROs at the latest follow-up.

Ligamentum Teres Reconstruction May Lead to Improvement in Outcomes Following a Secondary Hip Arthroscopy for Symptomatic Microinstability: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To present the indications, surgical technique, outcomes, and complications for patients undergoing arthroscopic reconstruction of the ligamentum teres (LT). METHODS: Articles were included if they had postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for arthroscopic LT reconstruction. Studies were analyzed for patient demographics, clinical assessment and indications, radiographic and magnetic resonance imaging data, concomitant procedures performed, PROs, surgical techniques, intra-articular classifications, complications, and need for follow-up surgeries. For PROs, the standard mean difference was calculated. The proportion of patients achieving patient acceptable symptomatic state for postoperative modified Harris Hip Score (≥74) was recorded. The number of patients achieving minimal clinically important difference for modified Harris Hip Score (Δ ≥8) was calculated. RESULTS: The majority of the cases were revision arthroscopies. Of the 3 studies reporting on patients undergoing LT reconstruction due to microinstability, 4, 9, and 11 patients demonstrated a mean improvement of 25.7, 35.2, and 27.7 in modified Harris Hip, respectively. In addition, one of the studies reported a mean improvement of 31.1 and 4.2 in Nonarthritic Hip Score and visual analog scale, respectively. Of the 3 studies, the percentile of patients surpassing minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state ranged between 50% and 100% and 33.3% and 88.8%, respectively. Overall, 5 patients underwent revision hip arthroscopy due to adhesions, iliopsoas impingement, and persistent microinstability, and 3 patients underwent a secondary hip arthroplasty due to refractory pain and radiographic evidence of hip osteoarthritis. CONCLUSION: Reconstruction of the LT may be considered in surgical management for patients with symptomatic hip instability due to soft-tissue causes. Current evidence supports for LT reconstruction predominantly for patients experiencing refractory instability following previous hip preservation procedures. Patients' expectations as well as the relatively high reoperation rate (i.e., 33%) should be discussed before the procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.

Isolated Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair Can Achieve Successful Clinical Outcomes at Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

PURPOSE: To report on clinical presentations and outcomes in patients who underwent an isolated endoscopic gluteus medius (GM) repair. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed and prospectively collected data on patients who underwent a primary isolated endoscopic GM repair. Patients were included if the following patient-reported outcome scores were obtained preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and visual analog scale (VAS) score. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the mHHS, NAHS, and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Scale was uniquely calculated for this study. Patients who underwent concomitant procedures including hip arthroplasty and hip arthroscopy were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 26 hips met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, of which 23 hips (88.5%) (22 patients) had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Nineteen hips had a partial-thickness GM tear; 17 (89.5%) were high-grade partial-thickness tears treated with a side-to-side repair through a transtendinous window. Four full-thickness tears with no retraction or fatty infiltration were able to be repaired endoscopically. The mHHS, NAHS, and VAS score all significantly improved (P < .05) from baseline: The mHHS improved from 55.9 to 75.4 (P = .005); the NAHS, from 58.8 to 79.2 (P = .003); and the VAS score, from 5.9 to 3.6 (P = .009). The MCID was calculated for the mHHS, NAHS, and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Scale as 5.8, 7.1, and 11.0, respectively. Most patients achieved the MCID for all 3 patient-reported outcome scores. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriately selected patients without concomitant intra-articular hip pathology may achieve successful outcomes at a minimum 2-year follow-up after an isolated endoscopic GM repair. Most isolated endoscopic GM repairs were performed for partial-thickness GM tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case-series study.

Revision Hip Arthroscopy in the Borderline Dysplastic Population: Reporting Outcomes With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up, With a Subanalysis Against a Propensity-Matched Nondysplastic Control Group.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy in patients with borderline dysplasia continues to be surrounded by controversy. Even more controversial is the management of the failed hip arthroscopy in this population. There is a paucity of studies in contemporary literature regarding outcomes after arthroscopic revision surgery. PURPOSE: (1) To report minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores in patients with borderline dysplasia who underwent revision hip arthroscopy and (2) to compare these PRO scores with those of a propensity-matched control group without dysplasia who underwent revision hip arthroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected between August 2009 and November 2017. Inclusion criteria were revision arthroscopic surgery, capsular plication, and baseline and minimum 2-year follow-up for the following PROs: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Patients with Tönnis grade >1 or previous hip conditions were excluded. Two groups were created: a study group with borderline dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA], 18°-25°) and a control group without dysplasia (LCEA, 25°-40°). Groups were propensity-matched in a 1:3 ratio for sex, age, body mass index, and follow-up time. RESULTS: A total of 22 revision borderline dysplastic hips (21 patients) had a minimum 2-year follow-up during the study period. Patients in this group reported significant improvements for all PROs from baseline and achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the mHHS at a rate of 70%. Moreover, 21 borderline dysplastic hips (21 patients) were matched to 63 control hips (63 patients). Mean LCEA for the study and control groups was 22.6 ± 1.7 and 32.0 ± 5.0, respectively. Both groups reported similar improvement in all PROs. The rate for achieving the MCID for the mHHS and VAS was similar between groups; however, the control group had higher rates of meeting the MCID for the HOS-SSS and NAHS (P = .042 and P = .025, respectively). The rates of conversion to hip arthroplasty were 7.9% (n = 5) in the control group and 23.8% (n = 5) in the borderline dysplasia propensity-matched group (P = .052). The rate of re-revision arthroscopy was 11.1% (n = 7) in the control group and 19.0% (n = 4) on the borderline dysplasia group (P = .350). CONCLUSION: After revision hip arthroscopy, significant improvement was obtained for all PROs in patients with borderline dysplasia at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Moreover, outcomes, patient satisfaction, the rate for achieving the MCID for the mHHS and VAS, and the rate for secondary surgery were similar to those of a propensity-matched control group without dysplasia. Nevertheless, there was a nonsignificant trend toward higher secondary procedures in the study group; therefore, arthroscopic revision surgery in the borderline patients should be approached with measured prognosis.

Combined Transfer of the Gluteus Maximus and Tensor Fasciae Latae for Irreparable Gluteus Medius Tear Using Contemporary Techniques: Short-Term Outcomes.

Combined transfer of the gluteus maximus and tensor fasciae latae (TFL) has been acknowledged as a treatment for irreparable full-thickness gluteus medius tears; yet, there is a paucity of reports on outcomes for this topic in the current literature. The purpose of the present study was to report short-term patient-reported outcome scores in patients who underwent combined transfer of the gluteus maximus and TFL in the setting of an irreparable gluteus medius tear. METHODS: Data for patients who underwent hip preservation and hip arthroplasty between July 2011 and November 2017 were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were considered for this study if they had undergone combined transfer of the gluteus maximus and TFL for irreparable gluteus medius tears. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients who had a minimum 1-year follow-up for the modified Harris hip score, Non-Arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score Sports Specific Subscale, visual analog scale score for pain, and patient satisfaction. The exclusion criterion was Workers' Compensation status. RESULTS: The study included 18 hips in 18 patients who underwent combined transfer of the gluteus maximus and TFL, with a mean follow-up of 39.75 months (range, 12.04 to 93.88 months). The average age was 68.48 ± 11.05 years, the average body mass index was 29.54 ± 6.23 kg/m2, and 13 patients were female. Abductor strength improved in 7 of 17 patients, with abduction data unavailable for 1 patient. Significant improvements were observed in modified Harris hip score from 49.73 ± 16.85 to 74.94 ± 17.91 (p < 0.001), Non-Arthritic Hip Score from 55.02 ± 22.53 to 72.78 ± 19.17 (p = 0.032), and visual analog scale for pain from 5.42 ± 3.42 to 1.57 ± 1.68 (p = 0.0004). No secondary surgeries were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes were observed in patients who underwent combined transfer of the gluteus maximus and TFL for the treatment of irreparable full-thickness gluteus medius tears at short-term follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Does failure to meet threshold scores for mHHS and iHOT-12 correlate to secondary operations following hip arthroscopy?

The purpose of this study was to determine (i) if failing to achieve a patient-reported outcome (PRO) threshold at 1 year was associated with secondary operations at minimum 2-year follow-up and (ii)what outcome measure and threshold has the highest association with future surgeries. Inclusion criteria for this study were cases of primary hip arthroscopy between July 2014 and April 2017. Included patients had recorded pre-operative and 1-year post-operative modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) scores. Patients were classified based on their ability to achieve minimal clinical important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for each PRO and the status of secondary operations at minimum 2-year follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio for these thresholds were calculated. Of 425 eligible cases, 369 (86.8%) had minimum 2-year follow-up. Of the included patients, 28 underwent secondary operations (7.59%), with 14 undergoing secondary arthroscopies (3.79%) and 14 converting to total hip arthroplasty (3.79%). For mHHS, 267 (72.4%), 173 (46.9%) and 277 (75.1%) hips met MCID, SCB and PASS, respectively. For iHOT-12, 234 (63.4%), 218 (59.1%) and 280 (75.9%) hips met the respective thresholds. The highest specificity, sensitivity and accuracy were identified as for iHOT-12 MCID (0.79), iHOT-12 PASS (0.79) and iHOT-12 MCID (0.77), respectively. Patients not attaining MCID and PASS for mHHS and iHOT-12 at 1-year post-operatively are at increased risk of secondary operation. The most accurate threshold associated with secondary operation (0.77) is not achieving iHOT-12 MCID. Level of evidence: retrospective case series: level IV.

Outpatient vs. inpatient hip arthroplasty: a matched case-control study on a 90-day complication rate and 2-year patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The transition to outpatient-based surgery is a major development occurring in recent years in the field of total hip arthroplasty (THA). The effect of this transition on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is still not well established. The purpose of the current study was to compare patients undergoing inpatient THA (iTHA) to patients undergoing outpatient THA (oTHA) regarding (1) perioperative variables including surgical time, blood loss, and length of stay (2) 90-day complication rates and unplanned emergency room or office visits (3) 2-year PROs including modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Harris hip score (HHS), forgotten joint score (FJS), pain, and satisfaction, as well as the quality of live measures. METHODS: The American Hip Institute registry was analyzed for patients undergoing THA between July 2014 and April 2016. The first 100 patients undergoing oTHA were selected and matched to 100 patients undergoing iTHA via propensity matching based on the following variables: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and smoking status. The primary outcomes were PROs at 2 years post-operatively. The secondary outcomes were perioperative surgical variables, 90-day complication rates, and unplanned emergency and clinic visits. RESULTS: After exclusions, 91 patients remained in each group and were compared. The oTHA group showed improved 2-year PROs with regard to mHHS (91.5 vs. 86.2; P = 0.02), HHS (92.3 vs. 87.4; P = 0.02), and pain (1.0 vs. 1.5; P = 0.04). The oTHA group had an average length of stay of 6.8 h compared to 43.2 h for the iTHA group (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding readmissions, emergency room visits, and unplanned clinic visits. Complications and revision rates were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: In appropriately selected, younger patients, oTHA can achieve improved postoperative 2-year PROs compared to iTHA. We found no differences regarding postoperative short-term complications or 2-year revision rates, and no differences in unplanned office visits or readmissions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic level 3.

Mid-Term Outcomes of Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair With Concomitant Arthroscopic Labral Treatment: A Propensity-Matched Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: To report mid-term outcomes of patients who underwent endoscopic gluteus medius (GM) repair with arthroscopic labral treatment and to compare them with a control cohort of patients who underwent arthroscopic labral treatment without an endoscopic GM repair. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy between February 2008 and August 2013. Patients were included if they underwent arthroscopic labral treatment, endoscopic GM repair, and had preoperative with minimum 5-year follow-up for the following patient-reported outcomes: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS). Propensity score matching was used to create a control cohort of patients who underwent primary arthroscopic labral treatment without GM repair. RESULTS: There were a total of 46 patients with GM repair eligible for the current study, of whom 43 (93.5%) had 5-year follow-up. The average follow-up time was 73.4 months. At minimum 5-year follow-up, all PROs significantly improved (P < .001). Among the entire GM repair cohort, rates for achieving the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for mHHS, HOS-SSS, and international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) were 74.4%, 51.9%, and 71.8%, respectively. Rates for reaching a minimal clinically important difference for mHHS, NAHS, and HOS-SSS were 79.5%, 89.7%, and 73.1%, respectively. When the GM repair cohort was matched, there were 37 cases in the GM repair cohort and 78 in the control cohort. The GM repair cohort outcomes compared satisfactorily to the control cohort for mHHS (82.3 vs 82.6), NAHS (81.9 vs 82.3), and HOS-SSS (66.3 vs 67.5). Rates of achieving minimal clinically important difference and PASS for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-12 were also favorable. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic GM repair with arthroscopic labral treatment results in safe, durable, and significant improvement in PROs at a minimum 5-year follow-up. The outcomes compared favorably with a control cohort without GM tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative study.

Return to play after hip arthroscopy among tennis players: outcomes with minimum five-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Playing tennis is associated with various movements that can lead to labral injuries and may require arthroscopic surgery. While hip arthroscopies have demonstrated good outcomes in athletes, there is limited literature reporting patient reported outcomes (PROs) and return to sport (RTS) in competitive or recreational tennis players after arthroscopic hip surgery. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to (1) report minimum five-year PROs and RTS in tennis players who underwent arthroscopic hip surgery and (2) compare outcomes between recreational and competitive tennis players. METHODS: Data for patients who underwent hip arthroscopy surgery in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement and labral tears between March 2009 and January 2014 and who played tennis within one-year of surgery were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with preoperative and minimum five-year postoperative scores for the following PROs were included: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) and Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for mHHS and HOS-SSS were calculated. RESULTS: Of 28 patients, 31 hips met all inclusion and exclusion criteria of which 28 (90.3%) had minimum 5-year follow-up (mean: 72.8 ± 13.9 months). There were 3 professional, 3 collegiate, 2 high school, 2 organized amateur, and 18 recreational level tennis players. All PROs significantly improved at latest follow-up: mHHS from 67.0 to 86.7 (P <  0.001), NAHS from 65.9 to 87.2 (P <  0.001), HOS-SSS from 50.0 to 77.9 (P = 0.009), and VAS from 5.4 to 1.8 (P <  0.001). There was a 75.0% RTS rate. Additionally, 66.7% of patients achieved MCID and 83.3% achieved PASS for mHHS, and 63.6% achieved MCID and 58.3% achieved PASS for HOS-SSS. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the level of participation, tennis players who underwent arthroscopic hip surgery reported statistically significant PRO improvements. A favorable rate of RTS was also achieved by players with a continued interest in playing. The data here may be useful in counseling tennis players of various levels who are considering arthroscopic treatment of a hip injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Achieving Successful Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy in the Setting of Generalized Ligamentous Laxity With Labral Preservation and Appropriate Capsular Management: A Propensity Matched Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Association among generalized ligamentous laxity (GLL), hip microinstability, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after hip arthroscopy has yet to be completely established. PURPOSES: (1) To report minimum 2-year PROs in patients with GLL who underwent hip arthroscopy in the setting of symptomatic labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and (2) to compare clinical results with a matched-pair control group without GLL. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data from a prospectively collected database were retrospectively reviewed between August 2014 and December 2016. Patients were considered eligible if they received primary arthroscopic treatment for symptomatic labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement. Inclusion criteria included preoperative and minimum 2-year follow-up scores for the following PROs: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and visual analog scale for pain (VAS). From the sample population, 2 groups were created: the GLL group (Beighton score ≥4) and the control group (Beighton score <4). Patients were matched in a 1:2 ratio via propensity score matching according to age, sex, body mass index, Tönnis grade, and preoperative lateral center-edge angle. Patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for mHHS, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Scale (HOS-SSS), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 57 patients with GLL were matched to 88 control patients. Age, sex, body mass index, and follow-up times were not different between groups (P > .05). Preoperative radiographic measurements demonstrated no difference between groups. Intraoperative findings and procedures between groups were similar except for capsular treatment, with the GLL group receiving a greater percentage of capsular plications (P = .04). At minimum 2-year follow-up, both groups showed significant improvement in PROs and VAS (P < .001). Furthermore, the postoperative PROs at minimum 2-year follow-up and the magnitude of improvement (delta value) were similar between groups for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and VAS (P > .05). Moreover, groups reached comparable rates of MCID and PASS for mHHS, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-12. CONCLUSION: Patients with GLL after hip arthroscopy for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement and labral tears may expect favorable outcomes with appropriate labral and capsular management at minimum 2-year follow-up. When compared with a pair-matched control group without GLL, results were comparable for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and VAS and reached PASS and/or MCID for mHHS, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-12.

Circumferential Labral Reconstruction for Irreparable Labral Tears in the Primary Setting: Minimum 2-Year Outcomes With a Nested Matched-Pair Labral Repair Control Group.

PURPOSE: (1) To report minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores of primary circumferential acetabular labral reconstruction using anterior tibialis allograft and the knotless pull-through technique in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and irreparable labral tears and (2) to compare these PROs with a matched-pair primary labral repair group. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they underwent primary circumferential labral reconstruction with anterior tibialis tendon allograft during February 2016 to April 2017 for irreparable labral tears and FAIS and had preoperative and minimum 2-year follow-up for modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale, Non-arthritic Hip Score, International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical component and mental component, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey physical component and mental component, and visual analog scale for pain. The exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip conditions or surgical procedures, Tönnis grade 2 or higher, or dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle ≤ 18°). Labral tears were considered irreparable if the labrum appeared (1) to be mostly or completely calcified and (2) to be inadequate (nonviable) and not amenable for labral repair. The reconstruction group was matched 1:3 based on age, sex, and body mass index to a benchmark control group of hips undergoing labral repair from the same period. The minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state for the mHHS and iHOT-12 score were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 37 hips (37 patients) underwent circumferential labral reconstruction. There were 19 female patients (51.4%) and 18 male patients (48.6%). The mean age was 45.6 ± 11.6 years, and the average body mass index was 27.1 ± 5. At minimum 2-year follow-up, the circumferential labral reconstruction group showed statistically significant improvements in the mHHS, Non-arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale, iHOT-12 score, and visual analog scale score. All hips in the reconstruction group were successfully matched to 111 labral repair hips. At latest follow-up, improvements in all PROs between the 2 groups were comparable. The revision rates were 0% and 3.6% in the reconstruction and repair groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After primary hip arthroscopy, primary circumferential labral reconstruction using anterior tibialis allograft and the knotless pull-through technique in the setting of FAIS and irreparable labral tears resulted in significant improvements in several PROs at minimum 2-year follow-up and high patient satisfaction. Primary circumferential labral reconstruction reached comparable functional outcomes to those of a benchmark matched-pair primary labral repair control group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control study.