Trajectory of clinical outcomes following hip arthroscopy in female subgroup populations

Evaluating the Impact of Capsular Closure on Clinical Outcomes, Revision Rates, and Return to Sports in Adolescent Females Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

Background

Young female patients undergoing hip arthroscopy have an increased prevalence of baseline capsular laxity of the hip joint. This laxity, along with superimposed postoperative iatrogenic capsular deficiency secondary to an unrepaired capsule, could potentially lead to worse outcomes after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in this population.

Purpose

To compare outcomes and revision rates for young female patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI and labral tear with capsular closure (CC group) versus capsular nonclosure (CNC group).

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent index hip arthroscopy using interportal capsulotomies by a single surgeon between January 2014 and February 2020 was performed. Female patients aged 12 to 21 years who underwent hip arthroscopy with cam or pincer osteoplasty and labral repair with a 2-year minimum follow-up were included. The Beighton score was assessed. The Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS) were obtained preoperatively and at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher exact test.

Results

A total of 23 hips (20 patients) were included in the CC group and 17 hips (16 patients) were included in the CNC group. The groups were not different regarding characteristics and preoperative patient-reported outcome scores. At all follow-up intervals postoperatively, the CC group scored significantly higher HOS-ADL and HOS-SSS. Fifteen of 17 (88.2%) patients in the CC group returned to sports versus 8 of 14 (57.1%) in the CNC group (P = .03). Four (17.4%) hips in the CC group had revision surgery compared with 9 (52.9%) hips in the CNC group (odds ratio, 5.1; 95% CI, 1.2-22.5; P = .02).

Conclusion

Young female patients treated with CC while undergoing arthroscopic FAI had improved outcomes, fewer revisions, and a higher return-to-sports rate than those treated without CC.

Hip preservation surgery for borderline and frank dysplasia: an overview of systematic reviews

Purpose

To identify, synthesise, and critically appraise findings of systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses on hip preservation surgeries for borderline and/or frank dysplasia with or without concomitant femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

Methods

A search, following the PRISMA guidelines, was conducted using Medline and Embase on 19/04/2023. Findings extracted from eligible studies were tabulated and synthesised.

Results

The search identified 477 references. Nineteen were eligible for data extraction: nine reported on arthroscopy, five reported on periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), one reported on shelf acetabuloplasty, and one reported on Chiari osteotomy, while two compared arthroscopy versus PAO, and one compared PAO versus rotational acetabular osteotomy (RAO) versus eccentric acetabular osteotomy (ERAO). The nomenclature and lateral centre edge angle (LCEA) thresholds to define hip dysplasia varied widely across included studies. All hip preservation surgeries provided good outcomes, with the Harris hip score (HHS) being the most commonly reported clinical score. Using the AMSTAR checklist for risk of bias, no systematic reviews were rated as high quality; ten were rated as moderate quality; six were rated as low quality; and three were rated as critically low quality.

Conclusions

Most published systematic reviews on hip preservation surgery are of moderate or low quality, and there is high heterogeneity among them regarding outcomes reported, follow-up periods, and definitions of dysplasia. The authors recommend the following thresholds and nomenclature for dysplasia: LCEA < 20° for frank dysplasia, 20°-25° for borderline dysplasia, and >25° for no dysplasia. Although all hip preservation surgeries can provide good outcomes, it is challenging to conclude which surgery provides the best outcomes and to determine if treatment options are dependent on LCEA.

Risk Factors for Failure of Hip Arthroscopy in Patients With Borderline Dysplasia Include a Tönnis Angle ≥15°, Age ≥40 to 42 Years, Female Sex, Anterior Wall Index <0.35, Labral Debridement, and Preexisting Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to determine potential risk factors for failure of hip arthroscopy (HA) in patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify English-language clinical studies reporting on patients with BHD undergoing HA from 2003 to 2023. The search terms used were (borderline OR mild) AND hip AND (arthroscopy OR dysplasia) AND failure. The primary outcomes assessed were risk factors reported by each study for failure of a HA-only approach in patients with BHD.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (8 Level III, 6 Level IV) met inclusion criteria, totaling 749 hips. Patient age ranged from 29.8 to 39.2 years, with a mean follow-up ranging from 24.0 to 144.0 months. The overall percentage of female patients ranged from 11.8% to 100.0%. Overall, the clinical failure rate ranged from 0 to 53.3%, and the reoperation rate ranged from 0 to 44.0%. The predominant predictors of poor outcomes after HA alone included Tönnis angle ≥15°, age ≥40 to 42 years at surgery, and female sex. Other risk factors for failure were preoperative clinical arthritis, grade 3 or 4 articular cartilage changes to the femoral head or acetabulum, an anterior wall index <0.35, and labral debridement. Revision procedures performed included revision HA (n = 88, 0-28.0%), total hip arthroplasty (n = 55, 0%-23.7%), and endoscopic shelf acetabuloplasty (n = 5, 0%-11.0%). One study included an additional 9 patients converting to either periacetabular osteotomy or total hip arthroplasty without distinguishing between the two.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with BHD, Tönnis angle ≥15°, age ≥40 to 42 years at surgery, female sex, anterior wall index <0.35, labral debridement, and pre-existing hip osteoarthritis are common risk factors for treatment failure following isolated HA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III-IV studies.

Borderline Dysplastic Hips Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy Achieve Equivalent Patient Reported Outcomes When Compared With Hips With Normal Acetabular Coverage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically review and meta-analyze studies reporting lateral center edge angle as it relates to patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and clinically notable outcome assessments for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome or labral pathology with borderline dysplastic hips (BDH).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science Core Collection databases were queried for articles evaluating lateral center edge angle as a predictor of PRO after hip arthroscopy. Articles were eligible for meta-analysis if they compared PROs measures between patients with normal acetabular coverage and borderline dysplasia and were at least level III evidence. Continuous random-effects models with standardized mean differences were used to compare postoperative Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living and sports subscales, modified Harris Hip Score, international Hip Outcome Tool scores, Satisfaction, and Visual Analog Scale Pain scores between normal coverage and borderline dysplastic groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 989 hips undergoing arthroscopy from six investigations were included in this meta-analysis, including 315 borderline dysplastic subjects (mean age 27.5 years) and 674 subjects with normal coverage (mean age 26.9 years). Borderline dysplastic and normal coverage cohorts were followed for an average of 37.0 and 36.8 months, respectively. Postoperative PRO measures (Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score, international Hip Outcome Tool-12, Satisfaction, and Visual Analog Scale Pain) collected approximately three years after hip arthroscopy were not markedly different between subjects with BDH when compared with patients with normal coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

In a meta-analysis of the available literature, patients with BDH are able to equally reach statistically similar clinical outcomes after isolated hip arthroscopy as compared with control subjects without dysplasia at short-term follow-up. A BDH should not be considered a contraindication to hip arthroscopy when optimal PRO achievement is the goal.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The Natural Course of Recovery After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement According to the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 and Hip Outcome Score Sports Subscale

BACKGROUND

A paucity of literature exists regarding trajectories of functional and sports-specific recovery after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

PURPOSE

To determine if subgroups of patients exist based on the recovery trajectory of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after hip arthroscopy for FAIS in the short-term period and to determine clinical predictors for these subgroups of patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained repository was queried for patients who had undergone primary hip arthroscopy for the treatment of FAIS between January 2012 and May 2018. Patients who completed the preoperative, 1-year, and 2-year International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) or the Hip Outcome Score Sports Subscale (HOS-SS) were included. The latent class growth analysis (LCGA) and growth mixture models (GMMs) were used to identify subgroups of patients based on trajectories of recovery for the iHOT-12 and the HOS-SS utilizing preoperative, 1-year, and 2-year follow-ups. LCGA and GMM models using 1 to 6 classes for each PRO were performed, and the best-fit model for each PRO was selected. After final model selection, a multivariable multinomial logistic regression was performed, with the largest class being the reference group to determine clinical predictors of subgroup membership.

RESULTS

A total of 443 and 556 patients were included in the iHOT-12 and HOS-SS analyses, respectively. For the iHOT-12, we identified the following 3 subgroups: early progressors (70%), late regressors (22.3%), and late progressors (7.7%). Predictors of late regression were workers' compensation status, psychiatric history, preoperative chronic pain, and lower preoperative iHOT-12 scores; and late progressors were less likely to participate in sports. For the HOS-SS, we identified the following 4 subgroups: early progressors (47.7%), late regressors (17.4%), late progressors (6.8%), and steady progressors (28.1%). Predictors of less favorable recovery trajectories (late regressors and late progessors) were older age, male sex, back pain, psychiatric history, preoperative chronic pain, greater alpha angle, and lower preoperative HOS-SS scores.

CONCLUSION

Using the growth mixture modeling, 3 natural courses of health-related quality of life (early progression, late regression, and late progression) and 4 natural courses of recovery of athletic function (steady progression, late regression, late progression, and early progression) were identified. Preoperative psychiatric conditions, chronic pain, workers' compensation status, and lower iHOT-12 scores were predictive of less than favorable trajectories of recovery according to the iHOT-12, and male sex, older age, back pain, preoperative narcotic use, and lower preoperative HOS-SS were predictors of less favorable recovery trajectories according to the HOS-SS.

Validation of the Dutch version of the Hip Outcome Score; validity, reliability, and responsiveness in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome

Due to a lack of a validated Dutch version of the Hip Outcome Score (HOS) considering functional outcome after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome, we validated the Dutch version of the HOS (HOS-NL) in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome for reliability, internal consistency, construct- and content validity. Furthermore, the smallest detectable change (SDC) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) were determined. All consecutive patients scheduled for an arthroscopic procedure for FAIS were selected. Five questionnaires covering groin and hip pain were filled in at three moments in time (two pre-operatively with a maximum two-week interval and 6 months postoperatively). Main endpoints were reliability (test re-test, SDC), internal consistency (Cronbach alpha), construct validity (construct validity was considered sufficient if a least 75% of a-priori made hypotheses were confirmed), content validity (floor and ceiling effects) and responsiveness (MCID). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.86 for the HOS ADL-NL and 0.81 for the HOS Sports-NL. SDC for the HOS ADL-NL was 21 and for the HOS Sports-NL 29 Cronbach alpha score was 0.882 for HOS ADL-NL and 0.792 for HOS Sports-NL. Construct validity was considered sufficient since 91% of the hypotheses were confirmed. No floor effects were determined. A small ceiling effect was determined for the HOS AD-NL postoperatively. The MCID for HOS ADL-NL and HOS Sports-NL were 14 and 11.0, respectively. The HOS-NL is a reliable and valid patient reported outcome measure for measuring physical function and outcome in active and young patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

Does the Rule of Thirds Adequately Detect Deficient and Excessive Acetabular Coverage?

BACKGROUND

Assessment of AP acetabular coverage is crucial for choosing the right surgery indication and for obtaining a good outcome after hip-preserving surgery. The quantification of anterior and posterior coverage is challenging and requires either other conventional projections, CT, MRI, or special measurement software, which is cumbersome, not widely available and implies additional radiation. We introduce the "rule of thirds" as a promising alternative to provide a more applicable and easy method to detect an excessive or deficient AP coverage. This method attributes the intersection point of the anterior (posterior) wall to thirds of the femoral head radius (diameter), the medial third suggesting deficient and the lateral third excessive coverage.

QUESTION/PURPOSE

What is the validity (area under the curve [AUC], sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative likelihood ratios [LR(+)/LR(-)], positive/negative predictive values [PPV, NPV]) for the rule of thirds to detect (1) excessive and (2) deficient anterior and posterior coverages compared with previously established radiographic values of under-/overcoverage using Hip2Norm as the gold standard?

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated all consecutive patients between 2003 and 2015 from our institutional database who were referred to our hospital for hip pain and were potentially eligible for joint-preserving hip surgery. We divided the study group into six specific subgroups based on the respective acetabular pathomorphology to cover the entire range of anterior and posterior femoral coverage (dysplasia, overcoverage, severe overcoverage, excessive acetabular anteversion, acetabular retroversion, total acetabular retroversion). From this patient cohort, 161 hips were randomly selected for analysis. Anterior and posterior coverage was determined with Hip2Norm, a validated computer software program for evaluating acetabular morphology. The anterior and posterior wall indices were measured on standardized AP pelvis radiographs, and the rule of thirds was applied by one observer.

RESULTS

The detection of excessive anterior and posterior acetabular wall using the rule of thirds revealed an AUC of 0.945 and 0.933, respectively. Also the detection of a deficient anterior and posterior acetabular wall by applying the rule of thirds revealed an AUC of 0.962 and 0.876, respectively. For both excessive and deficient anterior and posterior acetabular coverage, we found high specificities and PPVs but low sensitivities and NPVs.

CONCLUSION

We found a high probability for an excessive (deficient) acetabular wall when this intersection point lies in the lateral (medial) third, which would qualify for surgical correction. On the other hand, if this point is not in the lateral (medial) third, an excessive (deficient) acetabular wall cannot be categorically excluded. Thus, the rule of thirds is very specific but not as sensitive as we had expected.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, diagnostic study.

Evaluation of outcome reporting trends for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome- a systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the trends in the literature regarding surgical treatment for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and to present which patient-reported outcome-measures (PROMs) and surgical approaches are included.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted with the PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was performed on PubMed and Embase, covering studies from 1999 to 2020. Inclusion criteria were clinical studies with surgical treatment for FAIS, the use of PROMs as evaluation tool and studies in English. Exclusion criteria were studies with patients < 18 years, cohorts with < 8 patients, studies with primarily purpose to evaluate other diagnoses than FAIS and studies with radiographs as only outcomes without using PROMs. Data extracted were author, year, surgical intervention, type of study, level of evidence, demographics of included patients, and PROMs.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 2,559 studies, of which 196 were included. There was an increase of 2,043% in the number of studies from the first to the last five years (2004-2008)-(2016-2020). There were 135 (69%) retrospective, 55 (28%) prospective and 6 (3%) Randomized Controlled Trials. Level of evidence ranged from I-IV where Level III was most common (44%). More than half of the studies (58%) originated from USA. Arthroscopic surgery was the most common surgical treatment (85%). Mean follow-up was 27.0 months (± 17 SD), (range 1.5-120 months). Between 1-10 PROMs were included, and the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) was most commonly used (61%).

CONCLUSION

There has been a continuous increase in the number of published studies regarding FAIS with the majority evaluating arthroscopic surgery. The mHHS remains being the most commonly used PROM.

Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopy for Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: Selection Determines the Outcomes

Although the literature has presented results that favored arthroscopic procedures in treating borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH), it remains controversial whether arthroscopic surgery would be better than periacetabular osteotomy for BDDH. Instead of a debate on the application of arthroscopy, the issue worthy of discussion should be distinguishing suitable BDDH candidates for hip arthroscopy. First, identification of patients with real BDDH is critical for making management choices. Second, it should be distinguished whether the major symptoms result from mechanical lesions or functional hip instability. Third, once hip arthroscopy is suggested for BDDH patients, relative contraindications such as advanced age and osteoarthritis should be taken into consideration, in addition to labral repair and capsular closure or plication intraoperatively. In conclusion, more long-term and high-grade evidence is still demanded to end the debate, but we believe that an individualized management strategy based on an accurate diagnosis and comprehensive assessment will bring optimal outcomes for BDDH patients.

Hip Arthroscopy and Borderline Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To provide an up-to-date evidence-based review of hip arthroscopy for patients with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH).

METHODS

Literature describing hip arthroscopy in patients with BDDH was systematically identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. All studies that involved BDDH and not just those reporting their clinical outcomes were included. Methodological Index for Non Randomized Studies criteria and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the quality of studies. The definition of BDDH, operative technique, correlation with labrum and/or cartilage lesions, outcome, and factors associated with poor outcome were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Assessment of the articles yielded 28 studies involving 1502 hips that were included for final analysis. There were no studies with a high risk of bias. BDDH was defined as lateral center-edge angle of 20° to 25° in most studies. Hip arthroscopy for BDDH showed an improvement in the weighted mean postoperative modified Harris Hip Score, from 60.2 to 81.7, a relatively high rate of acquisition of minimal clinically important difference of 79.5% to 87%, and had 1.0% rate of complications. Eleven studies reported on all the patients undergoing a capsular plication. Four studies reported that BDDH was associated with cartilage damage on the femoral head. Age older than 35 or 42 years and ≥20° of femoral anteversion were reported as risk factors for poor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Hip arthroscopy for BDDH with capsular plication provides improvement in patient-reported outcome measures and a relatively high rate of acquisition of minimal clinically important difference with a low rate of complications in the shorter term. BDDH may be associated with cartilage damage on the femoral head. Female sex is a factor related to good outcomes, whereas older age, excessive femoral anteversion, and anterior undercoverage of acetabulum are risk factors related to poorer outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III to IV studies.

A tiered system using substantial clinical benefit and patient acceptable symptomatic state scores to evaluate 2-year outcomes of hip arthroscopy with the Hip Outcome Score

There is no information to define variations in hip arthroscopy outcomes at 2-year follow-up using the Hip Outcome Score (HOS). To offer a tiered system using HOS absolute substantial clinical benefit (SCB) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) scores for 2-year hip arthroscopy outcome assessment. This was a retrospective review of patients having hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement and/or chondrolabral pathology. On initial assessment and 2 years (±2 months) post-operatively, subjects completed the HOS activity of daily living (ADL) and Sports subscales, categorical self-rating of function and visual analog scale for satisfaction with surgery. Receiver operator characteristic analysis identified absolute SCB and PASS HOS ADL and Sports subscale scores. Subjects consisted of 462 (70%) females and 196 (30%) males with a mean age of 35.3 years [standard deviation (SD) 13] and mean follow-up of 722 days (SD 29). SCB and PASS scores for the HOS ADL and Sports subscales were accurate in identifying those at a ‘nearly normal’ and ‘normal’ self- report of function and at least 75% and 100% levels of satisfaction (area under the curve >0.70). This study provides tiered SCB and PASS HOS scores to define variations in 2-year (±2 months) outcome after hip arthroscopy. HOS ADL subscale scores of 84 and 94 and Sports subscale scores of 61 and 87 were associated with a ‘nearly normal’ and ‘normal’ self-report of function, respectively. HOS ADL subscale scores of 86 and 94 and Sports subscale score of 74 and 87 were associated with being at least 75% and 100% satisfied with surgery, respectively. Level of evidence: III, retrospective comparative study.