Does Prior Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement Compromise Hip Arthroplasty Outcomes?

Direct anterior total hip arthroplasty after hip arthroscopy: A retrospective review

Introduction

Limited studies have investigated outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) after ipsilateral hip arthroscopy, with mixed conclusions. There is need to provide clarity on potential risks/complications associated with this sequence of operations.

Methods

This is a retrospective single surgeon cohort study, evaluating patients from 01/01/2012-01/01/2020 undergoing direct anterior THA for osteoarthritis, with minimum 90-day follow-up. There were two groups: previous hip arthroscopy plus THA (THA+) and isolated THA (control) without previous hip arthroscopy. All THA + patients had undergone one previous hip arthroscopy prior to THA. Quantitative variables were evaluated using the Mann-Whitney-U test or a two-tailed unpaired t-test. Nominal variables were evaluated using the chi-square or Fisher's Exact test. Significance was assessed at p < 0.05.

Results

Seventy-one patients were included, 38 patients in the THA + group, and 33 patients in the control group. Surgery duration was longer in the THA + group (74 min THA + [SD = 9.5], 60 min control [SD = 11.3], p < 0.0001). The only secondary outcome with significance was average estimated blood loss (400 mL THA+, 275 mL control, p = 0.009). Only one THA + patient required postoperative transfusion (p = 1.0). There were no postoperative deep infections requiring debridement, intra-operative fractures requiring fixation, or postoperative dislocations in either group. The THA group had one post-operative fracture requiring surgery. The THA + group was younger (average) than the control group (52 THA + [SD = 9.9], 58.4 control [SD = 8.8], p = 0.0062).

Conclusion

This study highlights increased operative time and estimated blood loss after previous ipsilateral hip arthroscopy. Surgeons should recognize implications on time management, and assist surgeons when deciding to perform a THA at a surgery center vs hospital. These results contribute to a growing body of literature indicating no increase in major complication rate of THA after ipsilateral hip arthroscopy.

Patient-reported Outcomes of Direct Anterior Approach Hip Arthroplasty After Previous Hip Arthroscopy: A Matched Case-control Study With a Minimum 5-year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of prior hip arthroscopy on direct anterior approach (DAA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) midterm outcomes, with a secondary analysis based on time to conversion to THA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent THA by the DAA from 2009 to 2018. Eligible patients completed minimum 5-year follow-up patient-reported outcomes (PROs) questionnaires. Patients with a previous hip arthroscopy (THA-PA) were propensity matched in a 1:2 ratio to a control group of primary arthroplasty patients (THA-N-PA). A secondary analysis based on time to conversion to THA from the previous hip arthroscopy was conducted within the study group.

RESULTS

A total of 402 patients were included. Favorable and comparable (P>0.05) outcomes were observed at minimum 5-year follow-up for all PROs evaluated except Visual Analogue Scale pain scale, where the THA-PA group had significantly higher scores (P<0.05). Importantly, the groups reported similar complications and revision surgery rates. Furthermore, the secondary analysis found patients that converted within one year from the previous hip arthroscopy showed significantly lower patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a history of hip arthroscopy who underwent THA using the DAA demonstrated comparable and sustainable outcomes across all PROs, with similar complication and revision rates to the control group at midterm follow-up. However, patients who underwent THA within one year of prior hip arthroscopy reported significantly lower satisfaction levels. Careful patient selection and indication for hip arthroscopy are essential to avoid early conversion to THA. [Orthopedics. 202x;4x(x):xx-xx.].

Outcomes of conversion total hip arthroplasty following previous hip fracture surgery

Aims

The conversion of previous hip fracture surgery to total hip arthroplasty (CTHA) can be surgically challenging with unpredictable outcomes; reported complication rates vary significantly. This study aimed to establish the medium-term survival and outcomes of CTHA performed following a previous hip fracture surgery.

Methods

All CTHAs performed at our tertiary orthopaedic institution between January 2008 and January 2020 following previous ipsilateral hip fracture surgery were included. Patients were followed up clinically using Oxford Hip Scores (OHS), and radiologically until death or revision surgery. Postoperative complications, radiological implant failure, and indications for revision surgery were reviewed.

Results

A total of 166 patients (167 hips) were included in the study, with a mean age of 71 years (42 to 99). Of these, 113 patients (67.7%) were female. CTHA followed cannulated screw fixation in 75 cases, hemiarthroplasty in 18, dynamic hip screw fixation in 47, and cephalomedullary nail in 27 cases. Patients were followed up for a mean of four years (0.1 to 9.3). During the follow-up period, 32 patients (19.2%) died. Overall, 14 patients (8.4%) suffered a complication of surgery, with intraoperative fractures (4.2%) and dislocations (3.6%) predominating. The survival probability was 96% at 9.53 years in the cemented group and 88% at 9.42 years in the uncemented group (p = 0.317). The median OHS improved from 13 (IQR 7.75 to 21.25) preoperatively to 39 (IQR 31 to 45) postoperatively in the uncemented group, and from 14 (IQR 10.5 to 22) to 38 (IQR 27 to 45) in the cemented group.

Conclusion

This study highlights that CTHA from hip fracture surgery is associated with higher complication rates than conventional THA, but good medium-term results can be achieved. Their classification within the NJR requires review, acknowledging the increased potential for complications.

Prior hip arthroscopy increases the risk of dislocation, reoperation, and revision after hip arthroplasty: An updated meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

The indications for hip arthroscopy have been increasing, as have been the number of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) after hip arthroscopy. Several matched cohort studies have assessed the impact of prior hip arthroscopy on THA, but conflicting results have been observed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of prior arthroscopy on subsequent THA.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist. PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. Dichotomous variables were summarized qualitatively as a meta-analysis of pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and continuous variables were summarized as standardized mean differences and 95% CIs. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. The risk of bias was evaluated for each study, as was publication bias.

RESULTS

In patients who underwent hip arthroscopy prior to THA, the ORs for dislocation, reoperation, and revision were 2.02 (P = 0.01), 1.66 (P = 0.01), and 2.15 (P = 0.001), respectively. There were no significant between-group differences in the Harris Hip Score (HHS; P = 0.40), WOMAC (P = 0.069), FJS-12 (P = 0.77), estimated blood loss (P = 0.48), and surgical time (P = 0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Prior hip arthroscopy is a risk for postoperative dislocation, reoperation, or revision after conversion THA. However, prior hip arthroscopy has no effect on patient-reported outcomes, or operative factors such as surgical time and blood loss.

Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Era of Bundled Care Payments: Impacts on Costs of Care

BACKGROUND

Conversion hip arthroplasty is defined as a patient who has had prior open or arthroscopic hip surgery with or without retained hardware that is removed and replaced with arthroplasty components. Currently, it is classified under the same diagnosis-related group as primary total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, it frequently requires a higher cost of care.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 228 conversion THA procedures in an orthopaedic specialty hospital was performed. Propensity score matching was used to compare the study group to a cohort of 510 primary THA patients by age, body mass index, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score. These matched groups were compared based on total costs, implants used, operative times, length of stay (LOS), readmissions, and complications.

RESULTS

Conversion THA incurred 25% more mean total costs compared to primary THA (P < .05), longer lengths of surgery (154 versus 122 minutes), and hospital LOS (2.1 versus 1.56 days). A subgroup analysis showed a 57% increased cost for cephalomedullary nail conversion, 34% increased cost for sliding hip screw, 33% for acetabular open reduction and internal fixation conversion, and 10% increased costs in closed reduction and percutaneous pinning conversions (all P < .05). There were 5 intraoperative complications in the conversion group versus none in the primary THA group (P < .01), with no statistically significant difference in readmissions.

CONCLUSION

Conversion THA is significantly more costly than primary THA and has longer surgical times and greater LOS. Specifically, conversion THA with retained implants had the greatest impact on cost.

Is Prior Hip Arthroscopy Associated With Higher Complication Rates or Prolonged Opioid Claims After Total Hip Arthroplasty? A Matched Cohort Study

Background:

Hip arthroscopy (HA) procedures have increased exponentially in recent years. Their effect on outcomes after subsequent total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains unclear.

Purpose:

To compare rates of complications and opioid claims after elective THA among patients with prior HA versus controls.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Patients who underwent THA were identified in the PearlDiver database. Arthroplasty performed for hip fractures and hip avascular necrosis were excluded. Within this population, patients with HA before arthroplasty (n = 3156) were propensity score matched 1:1 with controls on age, sex, US region, and several comorbidities. Rates of medical complications within 90 days and prosthesis-related complications within 2 years were queried. The number of patients with an opioid claim within 0 to 30 days and subsequent opioid claim(s) during the 90-day global period were obtained to assess rates of prolonged opioid use after arthroplasty. Rates of postoperative complications and opioid claims were compared using logistic regression.

Results:

Patients with prior HA exhibited significantly lower rates of readmission (5.6% vs 7.3%; odds ratio [OR], 0.72), pulmonary embolism (0.2% vs 0.6%; OR, 0.45), urinary tract infection (3.1% vs 4.0%; OR, 0.75), and blood transfusion (3.6% vs 6.1%; OR, 0.55). The prior HA cohort also exhibited a significantly lower rate of prosthetic joint infection at 1 year postoperatively (0.6% vs 1.3%; OR, 0.50). Rates of dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, mechanical complications, and aseptic revision arthroplasty were statistically comparable between the cohorts within 2 years. The prior HA cohort was significantly less likely to file persistent opioid claims after 30 days postoperatively, including between 31 and 60 days (27.2% vs 33.1%; OR, 0.74) and 61 to 90 days (16.2% vs 20.9%; OR, 0.71).

Conclusion:

After elective THA, patients with prior HA exhibited significantly lower rates of medical complications and prolonged opioid claims within 90 days and prosthetic joint infection at 1 year. Rates of all other prosthesis-related complications within 2 years were statistically comparable.

The influence of prior arthroscopy on outcomes of primary total lower extremity arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the impact of prior arthroscopy on postoperative revisions, complications, and other clinical outcomes after conversion total lower extremity arthroplasty.

METHODS

Two individual researchers conducted the platform searches on the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar electronic databases from inception to June 02, 2021. We identified cohort trials that compared the outcomes of patients who underwent primary THA or TKA in the prior arthroscopy or control groups. The primary outcome was revision, and secondary outcomes included reoperation, patient-reported outcomes, and postoperative complications. A modified version of the Downs and Black tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the non-randomized cohort studies.

RESULTS

Of the 23 included studies with 319946 cases, 18 were matched retrospectively and five were non-matched retrospectively. Methodological quality was high in ten studies and moderate in thirteen studies. Our analysis demonstrated that TKA or THA patients with prior arthroscopy were associated with an increased risk of revision, reoperation, infection, and aseptic loosening. THA patients with prior arthroscopy were also associated with an increased risk of dislocation. Furthermore, there were no significant intergroup differences in periprosthetic fracture, range of motion, Harris Hip Score, or Knee Society Score.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopy performed before total lower extremity arthroplasty substantially increased the revision, reoperation, infection, and aseptic loosening rates. THA patients with prior arthroscopy were also associated with an increased risk of dislocation. Patients should be counseled on the potential increased risks associated with conversion total lower extremity arthroplasty after prior arthroscopy. Further research is needed to better characterize these findings.

Total Hip Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy Has Increased Complications and Revision Risk

BACKGROUND

There has been an increase in hip arthroscopy (HA) over the last decade. After HA, some patients may ultimately require a total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, there is a scarcity of research investigating the outcomes in patients undergoing THA with a history of ipsilateral HA.

METHODS

The PearlDiver research program (www.pearldiverinc.com) was queried to capture all patients undergoing THA between 2015 and 2020. Propensity matching was performed to match patients undergoing THA with and without a history of ipsilateral THA. Rates of 30-day medical complications, 1-year surgical complications, and THA revision were compared using multivariate logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to estimate survival probabilities of each of the groups with patients undergoing THA .

RESULTS

After propensity matching, cohorts of 1940 patients undergoing THA without prior HA and 1940 patients undergoing a THA with prior HA were isolated for analysis. The mean time from HA to THA was 1127 days (standard deviation 858). Patients with a history of ipsilateral HA had an increased risk for dislocation (odds ratio [OR] 1.56, P = .03) and overall decreased implant survival within 4 years of undergoing THA (OR 1.53; P = .05). Furthermore, our data demonstrate the timing of previous HA to be associated with the risk of complications, as illustrated by the increased risk for dislocation (OR 1.75, P = .03), aseptic loosening (OR 2.18, P = .03), and revision surgery at 2 (OR 1.92, P = .02) and 4 years (OR 2.05, P = .01) in patients undergoing THA within 1 year of HA compared twitho patients undergoing THA more than 1 year after HA or with no previous history of HA.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing THA after HA are at an increased risk for surgical complications, as well as the need for revision surgery.

Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy: A Cohort-Based Survivorship Study With a Minimum of 2-Year Follow-up

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to determine which patient, provider, and surgical factors influence progression to total hip arthroplasty (THA) after hip arthroscopy (HA) through a large cohort-based registry.

METHODS

All patients ≥18 years who underwent unilateral HA in Ontario, Canada, between October 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016, were identified with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. The rate of THA after HA was reported using Kaplan-Meier survivorship analyses. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess which factors independently influenced survivorship.

RESULTS

A total of 2,545 patients (53.2% female, mean age 37.4 ± 11.8 years) were identified. A total of 237 patients (9.3%) were identified to have undergone THA at a median time of 2 years after HA, with an additional 6.3% requiring a revision arthroplasty at a median time of 1.1 years. Patients who underwent isolated labral resection (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.51 to 4.60) or in combination with osteochondroplasty (OCP) [HR: 2.11, 95% CI: 1.22 to 3.88] were more likely to undergo THA versus patients who underwent isolated labral repair or in combination with an OCP, respectively. Older age increased the risk for THA (HR: 14.0, 95% CI: 5.76 to 39.1), and treatment by the highest-volume HA surgeons was found to be protective (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.89).

DISCUSSION

Using our methods, the rate of THA after HA was 9.3% at 2 years. The rate of revision arthroplasty was 6.3% at 1 year. Patients who underwent labral resection, isolated OCP, and/or were of increased age were at increased independent risk of conversion to THA. Those treated by the highest-volume HA surgeons were found to be at reduced risk of conversion to THA.

Hip arthroscopy for hip osteoarthritis is associated with increased risk for revision after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

It has not been determined yet whether hip arthroscopy (HA) leads to adverse outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to (1) determine 2-year conversion rate of HA done for osteoarthritis (OA) to THA and (2) explore the relationship between HA performed in patients with hip osteoarthritis and the risk of revision THA within 2 years of index arthroplasty.

METHODS

Data was collected from the Medicare Standardized Analytic Files insurance database using the PearlDiver Patient Records Database from 2005-2016. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based upon a history of hip arthroscopy prior to THA.

RESULTS

The 2-year conversion to THA rate for hip arthroscopy in patients with OA was 68.4% (95% CI, 66.2-70.6%). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that OA patients who underwent HA prior to THA were at an increased risk of revision surgery (OR 3.72; 95% CI, 3.15-4.57; p = 0.012), periprosthetic joint infection (OR 1.86; 95% CI, 1.26-2.77, p = 0.010) and aseptic loosening (OR 2.81; 95% CI, 1.66-4.76; p < 0.001) within 2 years of THA.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of a large insurance database found the conversion rate from HA performed in Medicare OA patients to THA within 2 years is unacceptably high. Hip arthroscopy prior to THA also significantly increased the risk of THA revision within 2 years after index THA. These results suggest that arthroscopic hip surgery should not be performed in patients with a diagnosis of OA as conversion rates are high and revision rates post THA are significantly increased.

Prior Femoroacetabular Osteoplasty Does Not Compromise the Clinical Outcome of Subsequent Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the most effective treatment option for patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis after a prior femoroacetabular osteoplasty (FAO). This study evaluated clinical outcomes of THA after a prior FAO and compared the results with a matched group of patients who underwent THA with no prior surgical procedures in the affected hip.

METHODS

By reviewing our prospectively maintained database, we identified 74 hips (69 patients) that underwent THA after previous FAO between 2004 and 2017. They were matched 1:3 to a control group of primary THA with no history of any procedures on the same hip based on age, sex, body mass index, date of surgery, Charlson comorbidity index, surgical approach, and acetabular and femoral component type. At minimum 2-year follow-up, modified Harris Hip Score, 90-day readmission, and revision THA for any reason were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The median time interval between FAO and subsequent THA was 1.64 years. There was no significant difference in preoperative Harris Hip Score between patients in the case and control cohorts. At the latest follow-up, the median modified Harris Hip Score was 77.6 in the case group and 96.2 in the control, and the difference was not statistically significant. None of the patients in the case group developed infection. 7 patients in the case group required additional procedures at any point, compared with 15 in the control.

CONCLUSION

THA after prior FAO has similar outcomes to primary THA in patients with no prior procedures in the affected hip. THA can be performed safely with excellent outcome in patients with a history of FAO.

Influence of prior hip arthroscopy on outcomes after hip arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of matched control studies

BACKGROUND

No meta-analysis exists elucidate the impact of prior hip arthroscopy on the outcomes of subsequent hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the current evidence in the literature to ascertain if prior hip arthroscopy leads to inferior outcomes after hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

PUBMED, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched on May 20, 2019. Only English publications were included. The primary outcomes were postoperative complication, revision, and reoperation. Secondary outcomes included Harris Hip Score (HHS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), operative time, and estimated blood loss.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with a total of 1227 patients were included. The pooled data revealed that patients with prior hip arthroscopy were associated with higher risks for any postoperative complication (P < .00001), dislocation (P = .03), revision (P = .03), and reoperation (P = .02) following subsequent hip arthroplasty. However, there were no significant differences in infection rate (P = .22), HHS (P = .09), WOMAC (P = .19), operative time (P = .52), and estimated blood loss (P = .17) between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with prior hip arthroscopy are at increased risks for any postoperative complication, dislocation, revision, and reoperation following subsequent hip arthroplasty. However, prior hip arthroscopy does not appear to have an impact on the functional outcomes and intraoperative outcomes.

Mid-term Patient-reported Outcomes of Hip Arthroplasty After Previous Hip Arthroscopy: A Matched Case-control Study With a Minimum 5-year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Previous hip arthroscopy may affect the outcomes of subsequent hip arthroplasty. The purpose is to compare mid-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complication rates in patients who had previous ipsilateral hip arthroscopy (PA) with those without a previous surgery.

METHODS

A minimum 5-year PROs, complications, and revision surgery rates were compared between total hip arthroplasty (THA) recipients who received PA and those without. Available intraoperative findings, procedures, and conversion time of arthroscopies were reported. The relative risk (RR) of complications and revision THAs were reported. A Kaplan-Meier analysis assessed survivorship of revision THA.

RESULTS

There were 34 cases (33 patients) of PA that were matched to 89 control cases (87 patients). Both cohorts reported similar scores for Harris hip score, Forgotten Joint Score, pain, and patient satisfaction. No differences in the outcomes were found based on the arthroplasty approach. A higher postoperative complication rate {RR, 2.617 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.808 to 8.476)} and revision THA rate (RR, 13.088 [95% CI, 1.59 to 107.99]) were found in the PA group.

CONCLUSION

Patients with PA demonstrated similar levels of PROs as those without previous ipsilateral hip arthroscopy. There may, however, be a higher rate of complications and revision surgery in the PA group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Does Arthroscopic Repair of Femoroacetabular Impingement Pathology Affect Clinical Outcomes after Ipsilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty?

PURPOSE

Arthroscopy for repair of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and related conditions is technically challenging, but remains the preferred approach for management of these hip pathologies. The incidence of this procedure has increased steadily for the past few years, but little is known about its potential long-term effects on future interventions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether prior arthroscopic correction of FAI pathology impacts postoperative complication rates in patients receiving subsequent ipsilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) on a national scale.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A commercially available national database - PearlDiver Patients Records Database - identified primary THA patients from 2005 to 2014. Patients who had prior arthroscopic FAI repair (post arthroscopy group) were separated from those who did not (native hip group). Prior FAI repair was examined as a risk factor for complications following THA and a multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to identify risk factors for complications following THA.

RESULTS

A total of 11,061 patients met all inclusion and exclusion criteria; 10,951 in the native hip group and 110 in the post arthroscopy group. Prior FAI repair was not significantly associated with higher rates of 90-day readmission (P=0.585), aseptic dislocation/revision within 3 years (P=0.409), surgical site infection within 3 years (P=0.796), or hip stiffness within 3 years (P=0.977) after THA.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic FAI repair is not an independent risk factor for complications following subsequent ipsilateral THA (level of evidence: III).

Hip Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy: Are Short-term Outcomes Affected? A Systematic Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

To systematically review the published literature regarding intraoperative measures, patient-reported outcomes, and complications of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with or without a history of prior hip arthroscopy.

METHODS

PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for all publications regarding patients who had undergone a THA after a prior ipsilateral hip arthroscopy. Included studies were comparative in nature and included postoperative outcome measures. Excluded studies were opinion articles, review articles, cadaveric studies, case reports, or technique articles. Patient demographics, surgical outcomes, complications, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were recorded. This study was performed at the American Hip Institute.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included in this systematic review. These included 305 hips with a THA following a prior hip arthroscopy, with 502 matched control hips. Mean time for conversion from prior hip arthroscopy was 23 months and mean follow up was 35.9 versus 36.1, for the prior arthroscopy and control groups respectively. No significant differences were found regarding intraoperative measures and PROMs. There was no difference in rate of revisions at latest follow up. However, there was a trend toward higher rates of dislocations and infections in the prior hip arthroscopy group.

CONCLUSION

The short-term PROMs of those who underwent total hip arthroplasty with a prior history of an ipsilateral hip arthroscopy are comparable to those of patients undergoing primary THA. Although a conclusion could not be made regarding differences in complication rates between patients with a history of prior arthroscopy and patients undergoing primary THA, it is still imperative to consider the possible implications of a prior hip procedure on postoperative stability and infection rates. In summary, hip arthroplasty following a prior hip arthroscopy is a safe procedure with comparable short-term outcomes to primary arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review.

Prior Hip Arthroscopy Increases Risk for Perioperative Total Hip Arthroplasty Complications: A Matched-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic hip surgery is becoming increasingly popular for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement and labral tears. Reports of outcomes of hip arthroscopy converted to total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been limited by small sample sizes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of prior hip arthroscopy on THA complications.

METHODS

We queried our institutional database from January 2005 and December 2017 and identified 95 hip arthroscopy conversion THAs. A control cohort of 95 primary THA patients was matched by age, gender, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score. Patients were excluded if they had undergone open surgery on the ipsilateral hip. Intraoperative complications, estimated blood loss, operative time, postoperative complications, and need for revision were analyzed. Two separate analyses were performed. The first being intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications through 90-day follow-up and a second separate subanalysis of long-term outcomes on patients with minimum 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Average time from hip arthroscopy to THA was 29 months (range 2-153). Compared with primary THA controls, conversion patients had longer OR times (122 vs 103 minutes, P = .003). Conversion patients had a higher risk of any intraoperative complication (P = .043) and any postoperative complication (P = .007), with a higher rate of wound complications seen in conversion patients. There was not an increased risk of transfusion (P = .360), infection (P = 1.000), or periprosthetic fracture between groups (P = .150). When comparing THA approaches independent of primary or conversion surgery, there was no difference in intraoperative or postoperative complications (P = .500 and P = .790, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Conversion of prior hip arthroscopy to THA, compared with primary THA, resulted in increased surgical times and increased intraoperative and postoperative complications. Patients should be counseled about the potential increased risks associated with conversion THA after prior hip arthroscopy.

Prior arthroscopic treatment for femoro-acetabular impingement does not compromise hip arthroplasty outcomes: a matched-controlled study with minimum two-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI) is known as a predisposing factor in the development of osteoarthritis of the hip. In order to treat this condition, hip arthroscopy is considered as the gold standard in recent years. The number of performed hip arthroscopies has risen immensely. However, a number of patients with poor outcome after hip arthroscopy will require further surgical intervention, sometimes even conversion into THR (total hip replacement). The purpose of this study was to analyze whether outcomes of THR are affected by prior hip arthroscopy in these patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a THR following an ipsilateral hip arthroscopy were matched to a control group of THR patients with no history of prior ipsilateral hip surgery. Matching criteria were age, sex, body mass index, implants used, and surgical approach. Modified Harris Hip Score, surgical time, presence of heterotopic ossification, and post-operative complication were prospectively compared at a minimum two year follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirty-three THR after hip arthroscopy patients were successfully matched to control patients. There was no significant difference in mHHS between both groups (FAI treatment group 92.8 vs. control group 93.8, p = 0.07). However, FAI treatment group showed a lower mHHS score pre-operatively (48 vs. 60, p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in surgical time and post-operative complication rate. No heterotopic ossification could be found.

CONCLUSION

A prior hip arthroscopy has no affect to clinical outcomes of subsequent THR.

Does Prior Hip Arthroscopy Affect Outcomes of Subsequent Hip Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To compare outcomes of hip arthroplasty in patients with and without a history of hip arthroscopy through a systematic review.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the PubMed (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Central databases was performed using combinations of the keywords "hip," "arthroscopy," "arthroscopic," "arthroplasty," "replacement," and "conversion" in December 2017. Level I through III studies directly comparing outcomes of total or resurfacing hip arthroplasty between patients with and without a history of hip arthroscopy were included in this review if they reported at least 1 outcome measure.

RESULTS

Seven retrospective case-control studies collectively evaluating arthroplasty outcomes of 235 patients (104 male and 131 female patients) with a history of hip arthroscopy and 374 matched controls met the inclusion criteria. The mean age in the arthroscopy and control groups was 47.2 years and 49.1 years, respectively. The mean follow-up period after arthroplasty was 3.2 years in the hip arthroscopy group and 3.3 years in the control group. The mean time between arthroscopy and arthroplasty was 1.8 years. A posterior approach was used in 83.6% of arthroplasties. No statistically significant differences were noted in intraoperative measures, postoperative complications, or revision rates, with the exception of 1 study that reported an increased operative time among controls. Most studies reported similar subjective outcomes between groups, with a single study noting worse postoperative findings for the Harris Hip Score, Forgotten Joint Score-12, visual analog scale pain score, and patient satisfaction in the prior hip arthroscopy group.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature suggests that short-term and midterm outcomes of hip arthroplasty are comparable in patients with and without a history of hip arthroscopy. However, the available literature is limited given the small sample sizes and therefore greater potential for β error. Nevertheless, our findings may be useful for surgeons evaluating risks and prognoses in this patient population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level III studies.

Shoulder Arthroplasty Outcomes After Prior Non-Arthroplasty Shoulder Surgery

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare outcomes and complications in patients with and patients without a history of non-arthroplasty surgery on the ipsilateral shoulder who later underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). We hypothesized that patients who had undergone prior surgery would have more complications and worse clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who had undergone shoulder arthroplasty and had been followed for a minimum of 2 years were evaluated with the American Shoulder and Elbow Society scoring system (ASES), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) assessments and with physical examination, including range-of motion assessments. Complications and outcomes in patients who had undergone prior surgery on the ipsilateral shoulder (PS group) were compared with those in patients without such a history (NPS group).

RESULTS

Data on 506 shoulder arthroplasties (263 TSA and 243 RTSA) were available for analysis. A total of 144 patients (28%) had an average of 1.9 ± 1.0 surgical procedures on the ipsilateral shoulder before arthroplasty. The average age in the PS group was significantly younger at the time of arthroplasty compared with the NPS group (61.6 ± 10.2 years compared with 68.2 ± 8.6 years, p = 0.035). At an average follow-up of 42.8 ± 16.4 months, both groups had significant improvements in ASES, SST, VAS, and range-of-motion values (p < 0.05 for all). All outcome scores in the PS group were significantly lower than those in the NPS group (p < 0.001 for all). The PS group also had a significantly higher complication rate than the NPS group (19.4% compared with 4.4%, p < 0.001), and multivariate regression analysis revealed that prior surgery was a significant independent predictor of postoperative complications. There were no differences between the PS and NPS groups in the number of postoperative infections (p = 0.679), reoperations (p = 0.553), or transfusions (p = 0.220).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who have a history of prior surgery on the ipsilateral shoulder derive benefit from shoulder arthroplasty, but their magnitude of improvement and final scores are lower than those of patients who do not have such a history. This information can be used to counsel this challenging patient population on expected outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Alternative Payment Models Should Risk-Adjust for Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

For Medicare beneficiaries, hospital reimbursement for nonrevision hip arthroplasty is anchored to either diagnosis-related group code 469 or 470. Under alternative payment models, reimbursement for care episodes is not further risk-adjusted. This study's purpose was to compare outcomes of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) vs conversion THA to explore the rationale for risk adjustment for conversion procedures.

METHODS

All primary and conversion THAs from 2007 to 2014, excluding acute hip fractures and cancer patients, were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Conversion and primary THA patients were matched 1:1 using propensity scores, based on preoperative covariates. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated associations between conversion THA and 30-day outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2018 conversions were matched to 2018 primaries. There were no differences in preoperative covariates. Conversions had longer operative times (148 vs 95 minutes, P < .001), more transfusions (37% vs 17%, P < .001), and longer length of stay (4.4 vs 3.1 days, P < .001). Conversion THA had increased odds of complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37-2.24), deep infection (OR 4.21; 95% CI 1.72-10.28), discharge to inpatient care (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.34-1.72), and death (OR 2.39; 95% CI 1.04-5.47). Readmission odds were similar.

CONCLUSION

Compared with primary THA, conversion THA is associated with more complications, longer length of stay, and increased discharge to continued inpatient care, implying greater resource utilization for conversion patients. As reimbursement models shift toward bundled payment paradigms, conversion THA appears to be a procedure for which risk adjustment is appropriate.

Prior Arthroscopy Leads to Inferior Outcomes in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Match-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most common reoperations after hip arthroscopy. Although arthroscopy causes changes in the hip joint and the surrounding soft tissues that can make THA more challenging, previous reports on arthroscopy before THA have not demonstrated any significant effect on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a THA following an ipsilateral hip arthroscopy were matched to a control group of THA patients with no history of ipsilateral hip surgery. Matching criteria were age within 5 years, sex, body mass index within 5, surgical approach, and robotic assistance. Harris Hip Score, Forgotten Joint Score-12, visual analog scale score, satisfaction, and postoperative complication and reoperation rates were compared at minimum 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirty-five THA after arthroscopy patients were successfully matched to control patients. There were no significant differences in demographics between study groups. The THA after arthroscopy group had significantly lower Harris Hip Score, Forgotten Joint Score-12, and satisfaction at latest follow-up. They had higher visual analog scale score and complication rate in differences that closely approached significance. There was no significant difference in reoperation rate.

CONCLUSION

A prior hip arthroscopy may adversely affect the clinical outcomes of THA. This potential risk should be considered when assessing the candidacy of a patient for hip arthroscopy.