Acetabular Labral Reconstruction Research Articles

Can the Acetabular Labrum Be Reconstructed With a Meniscal Allograft? An In Vivo Pig Model.

No single graft type has been shown to have a benefit in acetabular labral reconstruction. The native labrum and lateral meniscus share many similarities, suggesting that the meniscus may be a promising source of graft material in labral reconstruction. Using a pig model, we sought to evaluate the healing process of fresh-frozen meniscus allograft for acetabular reconstruction by assessing (1) MRI and macroscopic observations of the meniscus allograft; (2) histologic appearance and immunohistologic evaluation of the meniscus allograft, native meniscus, and labrum; (3) microscopic assessment of the native labrum and meniscus via scanning electron microscopy; and (4) biomechanical assessment of tensile properties. Twelve skeletally mature male miniature Bama pigs (24 hips) were randomly divided into two groups: labral defect group (control) and lateral meniscus allograft group. The selection of Bama pig specimens was based on the similarity of their acetabular labrum to that of the human acetabular labrum, characterized by the presence of fibrocartilage-like tissue lacking blood vessels. The pigs underwent bilateral hip surgery. Briefly, a 1.5-cm-long section was resected in the anterior dorsal labrum, which was left untreated or reconstructed using an allogeneic lateral meniscus. The pigs were euthanized at 12 and 24 weeks postoperatively, and then evaluated by macroscopic observations and MRI measurement to assess the extent of coverage of the labral defect. We also performed a histologic analysis and immunohistologic evaluation to assess the composition and structure of meniscus allograft, native labrum, and meniscus, as well as scanning electron microscopy assessment of the microstructure of the native labrum and meniscus and biomechanical assessment of tensile properties. Imaging measurement and macroscopic observations revealed that the resected area of the labrum was fully filled in the lateral meniscus allograft group, whereas in the control group, the labral defect remained at 24 weeks. The macroscopic scores of the meniscus allograft group (8.2 ± 0.8) were higher than those of the control groups (4.8 ± 1.0) (mean difference 3.3 [95% CI 1.6 to 5.0]; p < 0.001). Moreover, in the meniscus allograft group, histologic assessment identified fibrocartilage-like cell cluster formation at the interface between the graft and acetabulum; cells and fibers arranged perpendicularly to the acetabulum and tideline structure that were similar to those of native labrum could be observed at 24 weeks. Immunohistochemical results showed that the average optical density value of Type II collagen at the graft-acetabulum interface was increased in the meniscus allograft group at 24 weeks compared with at 12 weeks (0.259 ± 0.031 versus 0.228 ± 0.023, mean difference 0.032 [95% CI 0.003 to 0.061]; p = 0.013). Furthermore, the tensile modulus of the lateral meniscus allograft was near that of the native labrum at 24 weeks (54.7 ± 9.9 MPa versus 63.2 ± 11.3 MPa, mean difference -8.4 MPa [95% CI -38.3 to 21.4]; p = 0.212). In a pig model, lateral meniscus allografts fully filled labral defects in labral reconstruction. Regeneration of a fibrocartilage transition zone at the graft-acetabulum interface was observed at 24 weeks. The use of an autograft meniscus for labral reconstruction may be a viable option when labral tears are deemed irreparable. Before its clinical implementation, it is imperative to conduct a comparative study involving tendon grafts, which are extensively used in current clinical practice.

Acetabular Labral Reconstruction: Review of Techniques and Outcomes.

To analyze advances in labral reconstruction, and to discuss the literature relating to efficacy, outcomes, and technical considerations of labral reconstruction. The available evidence suggests that labral reconstruction is a safe and effective procedure that can improve pain and function in patients with severe and/or complex labral tears. The superiority of labral reconstruction over labral repair is uncertain, and it remains unclear what graft type and technique should be used in labral reconstructions. Labral reconstruction assists in restoring the function of the labrum of the hip. It consistently restores stability of the hip joint and demonstrates good clinical outcomes at follow-up. The optimal graft type, technique, and extent are still debated, and more research is needed. Ultimately, despite this uncertainty, labral reconstruction is proving to be a valuable tool for hip preservation specialists.

Poster 371: A Comparison of Fresh-frozen Tendon versus Fresh Meniscus Allograft Transplantation for Acetabular Labrum Reconstruction

Objectives: To document indications, surgical technique, and outcomes for acetabular labrum reconstruction in the initial series of cases using fresh meniscus allograft transplantation in comparison to a contemporaneous cohort of cases using fresh-frozen tendon allografts. The study was designed to test the hypothesis that patients undergoing labral reconstructions using fresh meniscus allograft transplantation would have better short-term outcomes compared to those using fresh-frozen tendon allografts based on patient-reported measures of pain and function. Methods: With IRB approval and documented informed consent, patients were prospectively enrolled into a dedicated registry designed to follow outcomes after allograft transplant surgeries in the hip. Included patients underwent acetabular labral reconstruction for irreparable acetabular labral insufficiency between November 2015 and June of 2021 with at least 1-year of follow-up available. Cohort assignment was defined based on type of allograft used for acetabular labrum reconstruction, as follows: Fresh meniscus allograft transplant (MAT) utilized to reconstruct the acetabular labrum; Frozen tendon allograft transplant (TAT) utilized to reconstruct the acetabular labrum. Patient reported outcome measures were collected pre-operatively and at regular intervals after surgery (6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and then yearly). Visual analog scale for pain (VAS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis (HOOS) junior, and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function scores were collected via electronic data capture. Patient electronic medical records were used to obtain patient demographic, operative, complications, and re-operations data. Treatment failures were defined as any revision surgery involving the hip joint or total hip arthroplasty (THA). Patients were considered successful when they were recorded as having returned to functional activities without revision or arthroplasty at final follow-up at least one year post-operatively. Initial success rate was calculated using the formula: 100% - (%revision + %THA). Final follow up was defined at 1 year (Range = 12-81 mos; mean 34.5 mos). Fisher exact tests were used to assess for significant differences in proportions. t-Tests or rank sum tests were used to assess for significant differences between cohorts at each time point. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to assess for significant differences within cohorts over time. Significance was set at P&lt;0.05. Results: A total of 27 patients (12 male, 15 female) were included for analysis. Mean age was 30.7 ± 9.2 years (range: 18-48) and mean body mass index (BMI) was 27.1 ± 5.4 kg/m2 (range: 20.1-44.0). Initial success rate for the entire group of 27 patients was 88.9%. Initial success rate in the TAT cohort was 80% with one patient undergoing THA at 4 months after transplantation. Initial success rate in the MAT cohort was 90.1% with two patients undergoing THA at 9 and 38 months after transplantation. Initial treatment success rates were not significantly different between cohorts (p=0.47). Treatment failure was significantly associated with concurrent femoral head OCA transplantation (p=.029, OR = 19.9). For the MAT cohort, clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in HOOS JR (p=.004, p=.023), VAS pain (p&lt;.001, p=.&lt;.001), and PROMIS PF (p=.044, p=.035) scores were noted at 1-year and final follow-up. For the TAT cohort, clinically meaningful improvements in HOOS JR and VAS pain scores were noted at 1-year but were not sustained at final follow-up. Conclusions: These data support consideration for use of fresh meniscus allografts as an option for acetabular labrum reconstruction when indicated. MAT for acetabular labrum reconstruction was associated with better short-term patient reported scores and success rate when compared to TAT, which may be related to biologic and biomechanical differences in graft types and transplantation techniques. However, only concurrent femoral head OCA transplantation was associated with a significantly higher treatment failure rate.

Primary Acetabular Labral Reconstruction In Adolescents, In the Rare Scenario of Irreparable Labral Tears, Resulted In Comparable Improvement, Clinical Benefit, and Revision Surgeries Rate to a Primary Labral Repair Benchmark Group

Primary Acetabular Labral Reconstruction In Adolescents, In the Rare Scenario of Irreparable Labral Tears, Resulted In Comparable Improvement, Clinical Benefit, and Revision Surgeries Rate to a Primary Labral Repair Benchmark Group

The Vascularization Course of Labral Autograft and Its Effect on Tissue Healing: Acetabular Labral Augmentation Versus Labral Reconstruction in a Porcine Model

Background: The preservation of the native labral vascularization is assumed to be the potential advantage of acetabular labral augmentation, the effect of which remains unknown. Purpose: To identify the vascular distribution within the labral autograft and its effect on the healing process between labral augmentation (AUG) and reconstruction (RECON) in a porcine model. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 36 pigs randomly underwent unilateral labral augmentation or reconstruction (AUG group, n = 18; RECON group, n = 18). The pigs were randomly sacrificed at 6, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively. The labral autografts were harvested for macroscopic evaluation and histologic assessment. The labral autograft was zoned into 2 halves to observe the vascular distribution: the capsular half (zone I) and the articular half (zone II). Each zone was divided into 2 parts: the peripheral part (IA and IIA) and the part attached to the acetabulum (IB and IIB). Results: At 6 weeks, there existed more vascular ingrowth in zone I, whereas zone IIB appeared nearly avascular in both groups. At 12 weeks, the area with the greatest vascularity was zone II in the RECON group and zone IA in the AUG group. The vascularity was concentrated at zones IA and IIA in both groups at 24 weeks. The labral autografts were hypertrophic with sufficient filling of the labral defect in both groups at 6 weeks. At 12 weeks, an insufficient volume of the articular half was observed in 3 of 6 labral autografts in the RECON group, while all autografts remained well integrated with the chondrolabral junction in the AUG group. At 24 weeks, unsatisfactory merging of the labral autograft with the cartilage at the articular side was found in 2 of 6 labral autografts in the RECON group, which was not observed in the AUG group despite the sufficient volume of autografts labrum in both groups. Conclusion: Slow vascular ingrowth within the articular half might account for the poor healing of the reconstructed labral autograft. Labral augmentation provides the possibility of better tissue healing because of the preservation of the original chondrolabral junction compared with labral reconstruction. Clinical Relevance: Labral augmentation might be a feasible alternative to labral reconstruction under the condition of viable labral remnants.

After Revision Hip Arthroscopy, Patients Having Either Circumferential or Segmental Labral Reconstructions for the Management of Irreparable Labra Show Clinical Improvement Based on Proper Indications

To compare a minimum of two-year follow-up patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) in patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy for acetabular circumferential labral reconstruction (CLR) and segmental labral reconstruction (SLR) using propensity-matched groups, in the setting of irreparable labral tear. Prospectively collected data were retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy from April 2010 to September 2018. Patients were included if they underwent labral reconstruction and had preoperative and minimum 2-year PROs. Patients unwilling to participate, with Tönnis grade >1, or hip dysplasia were excluded. Patients in the CLR group were propensity-matched on the basis of age, sex, body mass index, and Tönnis grade to patients in the SLR group in a 1:1 ratio. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) rates were calculated. Twenty-six hips (25 patients) with CLR were propensity-matched to 26 hips (26 patients) with SRL. The mean follow-up time 25.92 and 27.78 months for the CLR and SLR, respectively (P= .845). Groups reported comparable findings for sex (P= .773), age (P= .197), body mass index (P= .124), preoperative Tönnis grade (P= .124), lateral-center edge angle (P= .144), and alpha angle (P= .264), and comparable improvement for all PROs at minimum 2-year follow-up. Patient satisfaction was similar (P= .612). Rates of achievement for the MCID and PASS were comparable. Following revision hip arthroscopy, patients who underwent CLR or SLR for complete and segmental irreparable labral tears, respectively, reported significant and comparable postoperative improvement for all PROs and rate of achievement for the MCID and PASS at a minimum 2-year follow-up. III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

BMP-2 Modified Electrospun Scaffold for Acetabular Labral Reconstruction Promotes Collagen Fiber Regeneration in a Porcine Model

Background: Acetabular labral tear is one of the contributing factors to early hip osteoarthritis. Patients with symptomatic labral tears may require surgical treatment, and labral reconstruction is indicated in cases of irreparable tears. Purpose: The purpose of the study was to construct the bone morphogenic protein 2 (BMP-2) electrospun scaffold for acetabular labral reconstruction and analyze the composition of the labrum and the influence of collagen fiber distribution in regenerated tissue on the biomechanical properties of labrum. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eighteen mature male miniature pigs were selected for labral reconstruction in vivo. The animals were divided into 3 groups, including the autologous tendon group (T group), dopamine/polylactic acid–polyethylene glycol (PELA) electrospun group (DP group), and dopamine/PELA electrospun/BMP-2 group (DPB group), and the native labra were used as the control group. The microstructure of the reconstructed labrum was analyzed by scanning electron microscopy. Histologic and immunohistochemistry sections were used to evaluate the composition and structure of reconstructed labrum. The related gene expression was tested via quantitative reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction test. The compressive and tensile properties of tissues were evaluated using the elasticity test device. Results: Hematoxylin and eosin staining showed that the DP group and the T group were mainly composed of fibroblasts. The alignment of fibers was irregular. In the DPB group, the reconstructed tissues were composed of fibroblasts and chondrocytes, with parallel fibers and denser structure. The native labrum was composed of a large number of fibroblasts, which were arranged orderly and parallel, and there was almost no vascular proliferation. Under scanning electron microscopy, the reconstructed tissue of the DBP group was more similar to the native labral structure, forming a denser, clear-layered collagen fibrous structure, while the fiber alignment of the DP and T groups was irregular. The contents of type I, II, and III collagen (COL1, COL2, and COL3, respectively) were upregulated in labrum reconstructed with the DPB scaffold, while the gene expressions did not increase in the DP and T groups. The tensile and compressive properties of the implants in the DPB group were significantly enhanced. Conclusion: BMP-2 modified electrospun scaffold promotes collagen regeneration and osteogenic differentiation and is associated with better biomechanical performance of the reconstructed labrum. Clinical Relevance: This study demonstrated that BMP-2 modified electrospun scaffold could induce the regeneration of collagen and osteogenic differentiation and provide better biomechanical performance in labral reconstruction. This scaffold could be used in clinical practice after further improvement.

Labral Tear Management in Patients Aged 40 Years and Older Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Propensity-Matched Case-Control Study With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

Background: Previous literature has suggested that primary acetabular labral reconstruction leads to lower secondary surgery rates than does labral repair for patients aged ≥40 years. Purpose: To report minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores, survivorship, and secondary surgeries in patients aged ≥40 years who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with labral reconstruction compared with a propensity-matched primary labral repair group. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent a primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between January 2014 and June 2018. Patients aged ≥40 years who underwent a labral reconstruction or a labral repair and had preoperative and minimum 2-year PROs for the modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were included. Patients with previous ipsilateral hip conditions and surgery, Tönnis grade >1, hip dysplasia, or workers’ compensation status were excluded. Patients in the reconstruction group were propensity matched 1:2 to patients in the repair group based on age, sex, and body mass index. Secondary surgeries and achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and maximum outcome improvement (MOI) were recorded. Results: A total of 53 and 106 hips were included in the labral reconstruction and repair groups, respectively. The average follow-up time was 37.6 months. The average ages for the reconstruction and repair groups were 48.01 ± 5.4 years and 48.61 ± 6.0 years, respectively. Both groups achieved significant improvements in all PROs at a minimum of 2 years, with similar achievements of MCID, PASS, and MOI, and comparable secondary surgery rates. Conclusion: Patients aged ≥40 years who received primary labral repair and primary labral reconstruction achieved similar significant improvements in all PROs, VAS pain, and patient satisfaction at the minimum 2-year follow-up, with comparable rates of secondary surgeries and achieving MCID, PASS, and MOI. Based on these findings, labral repair remains the gold standard treatment for viable labrum in this population group, while reconstruction is a useful alternative for irreparable labrum.

Fluoroscopy-Guided Suture Anchor Placement Yields Excellent Accuracy for Arthroscopic Acetabular Labral Repair: A Cadaveric Study

PurposeTo determine the accuracy of fluoroscopy-guided suture anchor placement for arthroscopic acetabular labral repair in cadaveric hip specimens.MethodsTwo sports medicine fellowship–trained surgeons performed arthroscopic hip surgery on 6 cadaveric specimens each. Suture anchors were placed at the 11-, 12-, 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-o’clock positions of the acetabulum in each specimen using a previously described fluoroscopically guided technique. Gross dissection and thin-cut computed tomography scans were performed to assess for accuracy. The insertion angle between the subchondral bone and the drill bit immediately prior to suture anchor insertion was measured, and fluoroscopic visualization of the subchondral bone at each clock-face position was qualitatively graded as good, fair, or poor by 2 independent reviewers.ResultsOverall, 90.3% of attempts (65 of 72) were entirely intraosseous, 5.5% (4 of 72) perforated the articular cartilage, and 4.2% (3 of 72) perforated the far cortex, rates that are comparable with those in previous cadaveric studies. There was no statistically significant difference in accuracy between the surgeons (P = .42) or between the various clock-face positions (P = .63). Neither the insertion angle (P = .26) nor visualization of the subchondral bone (P = .35) was significantly correlated with accuracy by gross dissection.ConclusionsIn a cadaveric hip arthroscopy model, fluoroscopy-guided suture anchor placement yields excellent accuracy rates, similar to non–image-guided techniques.Clinical RelevanceIntra-articular suture anchor placement and intrapelvic suture anchor placement are known complications of arthroscopic acetabular labral repair. Fluoroscopically guided suture anchor placement can be a useful tool for hip arthroscopy surgeons performing acetabular labral repair and reconstruction, potentially reducing the risk of these complications.

Acetabular labral reconstruction with medial meniscal allograft: preliminary results of a new surgical technique.

Reconstruction of the acetabular labrum during femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery is accepted when the labrum is deficient and irreparable. Here we describe a novel technique using fresh-frozen medial meniscal allograft for labral reconstruction during surgical hip dislocation for correction of pincer FAI due to acetabular overcoverage. The results from seven hips (six patients) that underwent this procedure with 1 year minimum follow-up, and radiographs are presented. Six of the seven hips had improvements in pain, hip flexion, hip abduction, and Merle d'Aubigné-Postel scores. Only one patient with pre-existing osteoarthritis underwent reoperation with conversion to total hip arthroplasty. All digastric trochanteric osteotomies healed, and there were no cases of femoral head osteonecrosis or progression of Tönnis grades. The medial meniscus is a morphologically and clinically suitable option for labral reconstruction and effectively restores the hip fluid seal.

Arthroscopic acetabular labral reconstruction: a review.

The function and importance of the acetabular labrum in hip biomechanics have been determined. A labral tear is one of the most common findings in the hip preservation field, commonly associated with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome. It has been established that the restoration of labral anatomy and function are key factors to improve patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) and psychometric tools following arthroscopic hip arthroscopy in the context of FAI syndrome. Labral repair or refixation is currently the gold-standard surgical option when facing labral tears, with clinical mid to long-term data supporting its use. Labral selective debridement has proven to be a valid alternative in selective patients. Acetabular labral reconstruction has risen as an alternative to labral excision or resection when repair is not an option due to labral tissue deficiency. Restoring the labral sealing mechanism is the goal behind the acetabular labral reconstruction. It has been proven that labral reconstruction leads to superior PROMs when compared with resection. This review presents an analysis of the indications, techniques, and outcomes for arthroscopic acetabular labral reconstruction.

Arthroscopic Circumferential Acetabular Labral Reconstruction for Irreparable Labra in the Revision Setting: Patient-Reported Outcome Scores and Rate of Achieving the Minimal Clinically Important Difference at a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

Background: There is a paucity in the literature reporting patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) after revision hip arthroscopic surgery with circumferential labral reconstruction. Purpose: To report minimum 2-year PRO scores and the rate of achieving the MCID in patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopic surgery with circumferential labral reconstruction in the setting of irreparable labral tears. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Data were retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopic surgery between February 2016 and November 2017. Patients were included if they had undergone circumferential labral reconstruction and had preoperative and postoperative scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical and mental components (SF-12 P and SF-12 M, respectively), Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey physical and mental components (VR-12 P and VR-12 M, respectively), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Exclusion criteria were Tönnis grade >1, Legg-Calve-Perthes disease, slipped capital femoral epiphysis, fractures, hip dysplasia, or revision labral treatment different from circumferential labral reconstruction. The MCID was calculated. Secondary surgical procedures were documented. Results: A total of 26 hips (26 patients; 61.5% female) were included. The mean age and body mass index were 33.2 ± 10.4 years and 25.5 ± 4.9, respectively. Significant improvements were reported for the mHHS (17.0 ± 19.5; P = .0002), NAHS (17.9 ± 16.7; P < .0001), HOS-SSS (21.7 ± 23.1; P = .0005), VAS (–2.2 ± 3.0; P = .006), iHOT-12 (25.8 ± 32.5; P = .0007), SF-12 P (8.5 ± 11.2; P = .001), and VR-12 P (8.9 ± 11.6; P = .001). Rates of meeting the MCID for the mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, iHOT-12, and VAS were 76.9%, 80.0%, 65.0%, 62.5%, and 69.2%, respectively. No case of re-revision arthroscopic surgery was documented, but 1 case of conversion to total hip arthroplasty was documented at 38.6 months. Conclusion: In the setting of revision hip arthroscopic surgery and irreparable labral tears, circumferential labral reconstruction resulted in significant improvements in all PRO and VAS scores at a minimum 2-year follow-up with a high rate of achieving the MCID.

Arthroscopic Labral Reconstruction of the Hip: A Decade of Growing Evidence and Technical Evolution

The field of hip arthroscopy has rapidly evolved over the past 2 decades. Originally, surgical treatment of the hip primarily involved resection of damaged tissue. More recently, arthroscopic surgical procedures that aim to preserve and restore the function of the labrum have been advocated and have shown superior results when compared with debridement or excision. Although labral repair has been largely adopted as a standard labral preservation procedure to treat labral tears, continued innovation in hip arthroscopy techniques and tools has paved the way for labral reconstruction as an alternative and even preferable treatment option. As the clinical field has developed and expanded, so too has the availability and quality of evidence on indications, treatments, and outcomes of hip arthroscopy procedures. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the current literature on indications, arthroscopic technique, and outcomes of arthroscopic acetabular labral reconstruction and provide the lead author’s experience with arthroscopic labral reconstruction over the past decade. A growing body of evidence supports the potential to achieve positive patient-reported outcomes and low revision rates with labral reconstruction across different indications. These promising outcomes across a wide variety of settings and pathologies suggest that labral reconstruction can effectively increase function and decrease pain, making it an important hip preservation tool for the hip arthroscopist.

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

(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. 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. 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. 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 III, case-control study.

The anatomical properties of the indirect head of the rectus femoris tendon: a cadaveric study with clinical significance for labral reconstruction surgery.

Acetabular labral tear is a common pathology. In some clinical situations, primary labral repair may not be possible and labral reconstruction is indicated. Describe the anatomy of the indirect head of the rectus femoris (IHRF) tendon with clinical application in arthroscopic labral reconstruction surgery. Twenty-six cadaver hips were dissected. Thirteen measurements, each with clinical relevance to arthroscopic labral reconstruction using an IHRF tendon graft were taken on each hip. All measurements were taken in triplicate. Mean values, standard deviations and intra-observer reliability were calculated. The mean footprint of the direct head of the rectus femoris tendon was 10.6mm × 19.6mm. The width and thickness at the confluence of both heads were 10.9mm and 6.9mm, respectively. The mean total length of the footprint and "free portion" of the IHRF was 55.3mm, the mean cranial to caudal footprint measured at the 12 o'clock, 1 o'clock, and 2 o'clock positions were 22.3mm. The mean length of the Indirect Head footprint alone was 38.1mm. The mean length of IHRF tendon suitable for grafting was 46.1mm and the mean number of clock face sectors covered by this graft was 3.3 clock face sectors. Intra-observer reliability was ≥ 0.90 for all recorded measurements. The origin of the IHRF on the acetabulum fans out posteriorly, becoming thinner and wider as the origin travels posteriorly. The tendon footprint is firmly attached on the lateral wall of the ilium and becomes a free tendon overlying the acetabular bone as it travels anteriorly and distally towards its muscular attachment. The IHRF tendon is in an ideal location for harvesting and contains the appropriate thickness, length and triangular architecture to serve as a safe and local graft source for acetabular labral reconstruction surgery.

Reconstruction Guide for the Measurement of Segmental Labral Insufficiency: An Alternative Technique for Acetabular Labral Reconstruction

The acetabular labrum is a dynamic structure important for both hip stability and functional motion. Given its importance, injuries to the labrum result in significant symptomatic dysfunction caused by altered hip kinematics. Although labral repair represents the standard for symptomatic labral tears with underlying bony deformity, complex labral tears or those with significant degeneration may not be amenable to repair and require labral reconstruction. Labral reconstruction has been shown to restore intra-articular fluid pressurization to levels similar to those in the intact state, and cohort studies have increasingly demonstrated significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes at midterm follow-up. A critical component of successful labral reconstruction is accurate measurement of the graft length to restore native anatomy and kinematics of the hip. The purpose of this Technical Note is to describe a way to accurately measure graft length required for labral reconstruction.

Acetabular Labral Reconstruction: Development of a Tool to Predict Outcomes

Background: Acetabular labral reconstruction has demonstrated good results for labral lesions not amenable to labral repair. Purpose: To determine the predictors of outcomes at a minimum 2 years after labral reconstruction. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients included in the study underwent labral reconstruction with a minimum 2-year follow-up. The primary outcome variable was the Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL). Secondary outcome measures included the 12-item Short Form Health Survey physical component summary (SF-12 PCS) and patient satisfaction with surgical outcomes. Preoperative and intraoperative variables assessed included demographics, prior surgery, chronicity of symptoms, radiographic measurements, preoperative outcome scores, and findings at arthroscopic surgery. Predictors were assessed using logistic regression with restricted cubic splines. Bivariate statistics assessed risk factors for reoperation including revision arthroscopic surgery and total hip arthroplasty (THA). Results: Three hundred seventeen of 368 labral reconstructions were available for follow-up (86.1%). Of these, 42 were converted to THA (13.2%) and 35 required revision arthroscopic surgery after labral reconstruction (11.0%). Factors associated with THA included older age, ≥2 previous surgeries, ≤2 mm of joint space, and lateral center edge angle (LCEA) <25°. Factors associated with revision included female sex, ≥2 previous surgeries, and LCEA <25°. Six patients refused to participate (1.9%), leaving 234 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years (mean, 3.7 years [range, 2.0-11.3 years]). These patients had significant improvement in HOS-ADL (71 to 90; P < .001), HOS-Sport (47 to 75; P < .001), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (27 to 9; P < .001), modified Harris Hip Score (65 to 85; P < .001), and SF-12 PCS scores (41.6 to 53.1; P < .001). Median postoperative satisfaction was 9. Predictors of improvement for the HOS-ADL included higher preoperative HOS-ADL scores (P < .001), joint space >2 mm (P = .004), and no prior surgery (P = .039). Predictors of improvement for the SF-12 PCS included higher preoperative SF-12 PCS scores (P < .001), subacute chronicity (3 months to 1 year) of symptoms (P = .013), and joint space >2 mm (P = .046). Joint space >2 mm (P < .001) and higher preoperative SF-12 scores (PCS: P = .034; mental component summary: P = .039) predicted higher satisfaction. Conclusion: At a minimum 2 years’ follow-up, patients who did not undergo conversion to THA (13.2%) or require revision (11.0%), reported significant improvement in outcome scores and high satisfaction with outcomes. Predictors of revision or THA included ≥2 previous surgeries, low LCEA, female sex for revision, and narrowed joint space for THA. Higher preoperative outcome scores were the most significant predictors of improvement after labral reconstruction. Lower preoperative scores, joint space narrowing, and history of surgery were predictive of an inferior result and decreased postoperative satisfaction.

Graft choices for acetabular labral reconstruction.

ABSTRACTThe acetabular labrum plays a key role in maintaining hip function and minimizing hip degeneration. Once thought to be a rare pathology, advances in imaging have led to an increase in the number of diagnosed labral tears. While still a relatively new field, labral reconstruction surgery is an option for tears that are irreparable or require revision after primary repair. Various autograft and allograft options exist when considering labral reconstruction. The first labral reconstruction surgery was described using the ligamentum teres capitis, and has since evolved, incorporating more graft sources and reconstructive techniques. The purpose of this review is to assess and describe the different graft sources and technique currently implemented by hip surgeons. Moreover, this review attempts to determine whether a single labral reconstructive graft type is superior to the others. Techniques using the Ligamentum teres capitis autograft, ITB autograft, gracilis autograft, quadriceps tendon autograft, capsular autograft, semitendinosus allograft, indirect head of the rectus femoris autograft, peroneus brevis tendon allograft and Tensor fascia lata allograft were found. Scoring was available on 5 out of the 9 graft types. The advantages and disadvantages of each graft source is described as a comparative tool. No single graft type has shown increased benefit in acetabular labral reconstruction. The lack of uniform outcome measurements hinders comparison of reported outcomes. Surgeons should make an informed decision based on their experience as well as the patient’s history and needs when choosing which graft type would be best suited for their patients.

Arthroscopic labral reconstruction using fascia lata allograft: shuttle technique and minimum two-year results.

ABSTRACTThe purpose of this study was to describe the shuttle technique of acetabular labral reconstruction using allograft fascia lata and report minimum two-year clinical outcomes in a prospective patient cohort. We present a shuttle technique to introduce and fixate the allograft, by which the need to fix the free end of the graft from inside the joint is avoided. Between October 2010 and March 2014, 693 hip arthroscopic surgeries were performed by the senior author. Of these 693 patients, 34 patients underwent a labral reconstruction procedure using allograft fascia lata and the shuttle technique and met inclusion criteria. Outcome measures were collected at minimum two years postoperatively. 91.2% (31) of reconstruction patients were available for follow-up at minimum two years after surgery with 12.9% (4) of these patients converting to total hip arthroplasty at average time 27.9 months post-surgery. For the remaining reconstruction patients, mean mHHS increased from 64.0 preoperatively to 84.6 postoperatively (P = 0.0015), SF-12 Physical from 38.9 to 49.0 (P = 0.0004), SF-12 Mental from 49.5 to 55.6 (P = 0.0095), iHOT-12 from 36.4 to 68.1 (P = 0.0017), HOS-ADL from 62.6 to 81.6 (P = 0.0032) and HOS-SS from 32.9 to 65.7 (P < 0.0001). Arthroscopic acetabular labral reconstruction using fascia lata allograft and a shuttle technique appears to be an effective procedure for the treatment of labral pathology through minimum two-year follow-up. While it is difficult to discern the direct influence of the labral reconstructive procedure given the treatment of often concomitant intra-articular pathology, this patient cohort has fared similarly to other cohorts of labral reconstruction patients. No major adverse events are reported.

Primary Circumferential Acetabular Labral Reconstruction: Achieving Outcomes Similar to Primary Labral Repair Despite More Challenging Patient Characteristics

Background: Treatment of acetabular labral tears with moderate or severe intrasubstance damage or segmental defects remains a substantial challenge. Circumferential labral reconstruction with iliotibial band allograft is a relatively new technique that has been proposed to restore stability and eliminate high-stress junction points. Purpose: To compare outcomes between hips treated with primary allograft circumferential labral reconstruction and primary labral repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All consecutive hips between 2014 and 2015 that underwent primary reconstruction or primary repair by the senior surgeon were included and compared. Hips that had a prior intra-articular procedure were excluded. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores and visual analog scales were completed by patients within 1 week before surgery and between 22 and 26 months postoperatively. PROs included the modified Harris Hip Score, the International Hip Outcome Tool, and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey for physical health. Pain and satisfaction were assessed with visual analog scales. Crude and inverse probability of treatment weighting comparisons of PROs between groups were performed. Results: A total of 162 hips met the inclusion criteria for this study, including 99 labral repairs and 63 complete labral reconstructions. Patients who underwent labral reconstruction were, on average, older (43.4 vs 29.5 years; P < .01), had a slightly higher body mass index (24.6 vs 23.0; P < .01), had hips with a higher Tönnis grade (grade 1 or 2: 25% vs 9%; P < .01), had higher preoperative pain scores (49.9 vs 41.5; P = .01), and had hips with more severe pathology (68% vs 5%; P < .01) as compared with patients with labral repair hips. Five (5%) labral repair hips and 5 (8%) labral reconstruction hips failed treatment (P = .48). Among hips that did not fail (n = 94 repairs, n = 58 reconstructions), all demonstrated statistically significant improvements in PROs, and there was no statistical difference in PROs between groups after weighting (P > .05). Conclusion: Primary circumferential labral reconstruction is a viable treatment option with promising short-term outcomes for hips that demonstrate moderate or severe labral damage. Despite less favorable preoperative characteristics, labral reconstruction offers similar outcomes when compared with labral repair in hips with less severe pathology.