Capsular Closure Research Articles

Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Performed with Modern Surgical Techniques Provides High Survivorship and Durable Outcome

Objectives: To analyze predictors of clinical failure as defined by revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) as well as predictors of inferior outcomes defined as the not reaching Minimally Clinical Important Difference (MCID) or Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) for Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living Subscale (HOS-ADL). Methods: Prospective data on all patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with routine capsular closure for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) by a single, fellowship-trained surgeon between January 2012 and November 2015 were collected and analyzed. Inclusion criteria consisted of clinical and radiographic diagnosis of symptomatic FAIS, failed conservative management, and undergoing hip arthroscopy to correct FAIS with a minimum of two-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria consisted of prior ipsilateral hip surgery and hip arthroscopy for an indication other than FAIS. Baseline demographic data and radiographic parameters were collected and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were obtained at baseline and at a minimum of two-years postoperatively. Rates of clinical failure and inferior clinical outcomes were recorded at a minimum of two-years postoperatively then stepwise linear regression was used to identify patient-related and imaging-related factors as predictors of each, respectively. Results: Out of 1,161 eligible patients, 949 (81.7%) completed PROs at a minimum of two-years postoperatively. The average age was 32.8 ± 12.4 years with a mean BMI of 25.4 ± 10.7 kg/m2. The overall clinical failure rate was 2.2% (n=21) including eleven cases of revision hip arthroscopy and eleven cases of conversion to THA (one patient underwent revision then subsequent THA). The inferior clinical outcome group consisting of patients who failed to reach MCID for HOS-ADL included164 patients while those who failed to reach PASS for HOS-ADL included 353 patients. In the regression model, poor articular cartilage, hypertension, lateral rim impingement on physical exam, history of back pain/spine pathology, limp on presentation, decreased daily physical activity, greater preoperative alpha angle, weakness in abduction with knees extended, and prolonged symptom duration were predictive of clinical failure (all p-values<0.05). Predictors of failing to reach MCID for HOS-ADL included: prolonged symptom duration, history of back pain/spine pathology, Tonnis grade >1, being a current/former smoker, pain with ischial palpation, lateral rim impingement, snapping iliotibial band, and pain with resisted sit-up and over the greater trochanter. Predictors of failing to reach PASS for HOS-ADL included: prolonged symptom duration, decreased daily physical activity, workman’s compensation, history of anxiety and/or depression, snapping iliotibial band, limp on examination, and pain with palpation of the spine/sacroiliac joint (all p-values<0.05). Conclusion: The clinical failure rate of hip arthroscopy may be lower than previously reported. Reoperation is predicted by medical comorbidity, lack of preoperative athletic activity, and multiple positive physical exams. Inferior clinical outcomes are predicted by prolonged symptom duration, back pain, being a current/former smoker, a history of a psychiatric comorbidity, as well as numerous signs on physical examination.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Pigmented Villonodular Synovitis of the Hip Using Puncture Capsulotomy

Pigmented villonodular synovitis (PVNS) is a monoarticular, benign tumor arising from the synovium. Although classically treated with open synovectomy, arthroscopic treatment has demonstrated good clinical outcomes. The arthroscopic management of hip PVNS has been described as technically challenging due to difficulty obtaining the appropriate exposure. The purpose of this technical report is to describe a novel technique that allows for sound excision of PVNS during hip arthroscopy using a puncture capsulotomy. Full visualization throughout the central and peripheral compartments is key to achieving meticulous surgical excision and ablation, with careful attention to the medial and lateral synovial folds and gutters. It is important to avoid chondral injury by using a high outflow rate of irrigation to maintain a constant temperature, to ablate the blood supply of nodular lesions, and to not use a shaver as this may disseminate tumor cells. Multifactorial advancements in hip arthroscopy have permitted adequate visualization and exposure of PVNS lesions, making them amenable to arthroscopic synovectomy. Puncture capsulotomy does not require capsular closure, preserves the iliofemoral ligament, and minimizes exposure of extra-articular structures to the hip joint environment. Recurrence rates are lower in arthroscopic management compared with open management, at 7.7% and 17.8%, respectively.

Survivorship and Outcome of Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Performed With Modern Surgical Techniques

Background: Hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is a rapidly growing field in sports surgery; however, factors associated with poor outcomes and identification of predictor models of inferior clinical outcomes is unclear. Purpose: To analyze predictors of clinical failure and inferior clinical outcomes among patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for treatment of FAIS. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were collected and analyzed from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with routine capsular closure for the treatment of FAIS from a single fellowship-trained surgeon between January 2012 and November 2015. Baseline data, postoperative patient-reported outcomes, and rates of clinical failure and inferior clinical outcomes were recorded at 2 years postoperatively. Clinical failure was defined by revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Inferior clinical outcome was defined as not reaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) or patient acceptable symptomatic state for Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors of clinical failure and inferior clinical outcome. Results: Out of 1161 eligible patients, 935 (80.5%) completed 2-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes. The mean ± SD age and body mass index were 33.3 ± 12.3 years and 25.4 ± 8.2 kg/m2, respectively. The overall clinical failure rate was 3.6% (n = 34), including 23 cases (2.5%) of revision hip arthroscopy and 11 cases (1.2%) of conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Predictors of clinical failure were lower preoperative International Hip Outcome Tool score (P = .016), chronic preoperative pain (P = .001), and chondromalacia in the affected hip (P = .04). The inferior clinical outcome group, consisting of those who failed to reach the MCID for Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living, included 256 patients (27.4%). Predictors of inferior clinical outcomes were Tönnis grade >1 (P = .01), workers’ compensation (P < .001), and increased body mass index (P = .02). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that 73% of all patients treated for symptomatic FAIS with primary hip arthroscopy and routine capsular closure achieved the MCID. Clinical failure is predicted by a number of modifiable and nonmodifiable factors, including chronic preoperative pain and presence of chondromalacia. The current study updates the midterm failure rates and outcomes achievable with hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

Capsular closure outweighs head size in preventing dislocation following revision total hip arthroplasty.

The high dislocation rate following revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been shown to be significantly reduced by closing the posterior capsule and by the use of large diameter femoral heads. The relative importance of each of these strategies on the rate of dislocation remains unknown. We undertook a study to determine if increasing femoral head diameter, in addition to posterior capsular closure would influence the dislocation rate following revision THA. We retrospectively reviewed 144 patients who underwent a revision THA. We included all patients who underwent revision THA with closure of the posterior capsule and who had at least a 2-year minimum follow-up. 48 patients had a 28-mm femoral head, 47 had a 32-mm head and 49 patients had a 36-mm femoral head. At a minimum follow-up of 2 years, there were 3 dislocations. There were no dislocations in the 28-mm group (0%), 2 in the 32-mm group (4%) and 1 in the 36-mm group (2%). Head size alone was not found to significantly decrease the risk of dislocation (28-mm versus 32-mm p = 0.12; 28-mm versus 36-mm p = 0.27; 32-mm versus 36-mm p = 0.40). Both large diameter heads and careful attention to surgical technique with posterior capsular closure can decrease the historically high dislocation rate after revision THA when utilising the posterolateral approach. Capsular closure outweighs the effect of femoral head diameter in preventing dislocation following revision THA through a posterolateral approach.

Hypermobile Hip Syndrome

Hypermobile hip syndrome is defined as the triad of symptoms (pain and instability), physical examination findings (confirms the subjective history), and imaging findings (corroborates the subjective and objective examination) consistent with hip instability, manifest along a spectrum from microinstability to dislocation. Soft tissue (capsule and labrum) and osseous (coverage, rotational profiles) structures may contribute. Imaging may reveal unique findings, include an anterior or anterolateral hypermobile hip crevasse. Surgical management must ensure anatomical corrections of pathomorphology, labral preservation, and routine complete capsular closure, with variable degrees of plication and shift able to be achieved with modern instrumentation. Postoperative care with physical therapy and medical management optimizes outcomes.

Complete Capsular Repair Restores Native Kinematics After Interportal and T-Capsulotomy

Background: Although the use of hip arthroscopy continues to increase, capsular management remains a controversial topic. Purpose: To investigate the biomechanical effect of capsulotomy and capsular repair techniques on hip joint kinematics in varying combinations of sagittal and coronal joint positions. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight fresh-frozen hemi-pelvises (78.3 ± 6.0 years of age; 4 left, 6 male) were dissected of all overlying soft tissue, with the exception of the hip joint capsule. The femur was potted and attached to a load cell, while the pelvis was secured to a custom-designed fixture allowing static alteration of the flexion-extension arc. Optotrak markers were rigidly attached to the femur and pelvis to track motion of the femoral head with respect to the acetabulum. After specimen preparation, 7 conditions were tested: (1) intact, (2) after portal placement (anterolateral and midanterior), (3) interportal capsulotomy (IPC) (35 mm in length), (4) IPC repair, (5) T-capsulotomy (IPC +15-mm longitudinal incision), (6) partial T-repair (repair of longitudinal incision with IPC left open), (7) full T-repair. All conditions were tested in 15° of extension (–15°), 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion. Additionally, all flexion angles were tested in neutral, as well as in specimen-specific maximum abduction and adduction, resulting in 15 testing positions. Internal rotation (IR) and external rotation (ER) moments of 3 N·m were manually applied to the femur via the load cell at each position. Rotational range of motion and joint kinematics were recorded. Results: In the neutral coronal plane, T-capsulotomy significantly increased IR/ER rotational range of motion compared with intact state at −15° (55.96°± 6.11° vs 44.92°± 7.35°, P < .001), while IPC significantly increased rotation compared with the portal state at 0° (60.09°± 6.82° vs 51.68°± 10.35°, P = .004). No statistically significant increases were found in mediolateral joint translation after IPC or T-capsulotomy. Similarly, no statistically significant increases were noted in anteroposterior translation after IPC or T-capsulotomy. Complete capsular repair restored near native joint kinematics, with no significant differences in rotation or translation between any complete capsular repair groups and the intact state, regardless of joint position. Conclusion: Universally, across all conditions, complete capsular repair after interportal or T-capsulotomy restored rotational range of motion and joint translation to values observed in the native joint. Clinical Relevance: Where feasible, complete capsular closure should be performed, especially after T-capsulotomy. However, further clinical evaluation is required to determine whether adverse kinematic parameters of an unrepaired capsule are associated with reduced patient-reported outcomes.

Periportal Capsulotomy: Technique and Outcomes for a Limited Capsulotomy During Hip Arthroscopy

To present the technique and outcomes of a limited periportal capsulotomy without capsular closure for arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for symptomatic FAI was performed to analyze patients who underwent periportal capsulotomy. Periportal capsulotomy was performed through dilation of the midanterior and anterolateral portals without completion of a full interportal capsulotomy, preserving the iliofemoral ligament. Arthroscopic labral treatment and osteochondroplasty were completed as indicated without necessitating capsular closure. Patient demographics, surgical details, and complications were recorded. Pre- and postoperatively, patients completed the modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), 12-item Short-Form survey, and visual analog scale. Postoperative outcome data was analyzed at 1- and 2-year follow-up. One hundred and forty-two patients treated with the periportal capsulotomy technique were included (mean age, 35.5 ± 11.7; body mass index, 25.4 ± 4.1; 50.7% men). There were no major postoperative complications including hip instability or reoperation. Significant improvements in mean patient-reported outcomes from preoperative scores were seen at the 1- and 2-year follow-ups (modified Harris Hip Score, 18.4 ± 19.1, 21.1 ±17.7, HOOS symptoms, 20.1 ± 21.2, 22.8 ± 23.5, HOOS pain, 23.4 ± 21.2, 27.6 ± 19.3, HOOS activities of daily life, 21.2 ± 20.8, 24.3 ± 21.6, HOOS sport, 32.5 ± 27.0, 36.5 ± 26.9, HOOS quality of life, 37.9 ± 26.7, 46.0 ± 22.8, and 12-item Short-Form survey physical component score, 16.4 ± 15.3, 20.8 ±13.2, respectively). Only the HOOS quality of life demonstrated further improvement from 1- to 2years postoperatively (P= .043). Periportal capsulotomy provides safe and sufficient access to the hip joint for arthroscopic treatment of FAI without necessitating capsular closure. Using this technique, patients showed significant clinical improvement and no postoperative instability at 1 and 2years after surgery. Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Prospective Randomized Comparison of Capsule Management Techniques During Hip Arthroscopy

Objectives: Capsular management during hip arthroscopy remains controversial. Studies evaluating this topic consist mostly of retrospective comparative reviews of prospectively gathered data on a large series of patients. The purpose of this study was to perform a prospective randomized trial to comparatively assess three commonly performed capsule management techniques. It was hypothesized that capsular closure during hip arthroscopy would result in superior outcomes compared to non-closing capsulotomy management techniques. Methods: Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy were randomly assigned into three groups at the time of surgery: 1) T-capsulotomy without closure (TC), 2) interportal capsulotomy without closure (IC), and 3) interportal capsulotomy with closure (CC). Inclusion criteria included patients with labral tear on advanced imaging, cam lesion with alpha angle greater than 55 degrees, center-edge angle less than 40 degrees, and Tönnis grade 0 or 1. Patients younger than 18, older than 55, or those with signs of clinical hip hypermobility or radiographic dysplasia were excluded from the trial. All patients underwent labral repair and femoral osteoplasty. Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS) was obtained preoperatively and at intervals up to 2 years. Other outcomes obtained included need for future hip surgery. Results: 50 patients were randomly allocated into each group. Patient demographics, preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and radiographic measures of impingement were similar between all three groups. Revision hip arthroscopy was performed in 5 TC patients, 2 IC patients and 0 CC patients (p=0.17). Conversion to hip arthroplasty occurred in 4 patients in the TC group, none in the IC or CC groups (p=0.48). All three groups showed increased PRO scores postoperatively compared to preoperative values (p&lt;0.01). The CC group when compared to the TC group demonstrated superior mHHS (86.2 vs 76), HOS-ADL (85.6 vs 76.8), and HOS-SSS (74.4 vs 65.3) at the final 2 year follow up (p&lt;0.001). The IC group demonstrated more modest improvements in outcomes compared to the TC group. The CC group showed greater improvement in HOS-SSS compared to the IC group at early follow up (65.6 vs 55.1, p&gt;.001) that was not maintained at 2 years (74.4 vs 71.4, p=.28). Conclusion: Patients undergoing capsular closure during hip arthroscopy showed improved patient-reported and surgical outcomes compared to those with unrepaired T-capsulotomy or interportal capsulotomy. These results suggest that repair after capsulotomy may be a favorable arthroscopic capsule management technique, especially in respect to optimizing postoperative activities of daily living.

Periportal Capsulotomy: A Technique for Limited Violation of the Hip Capsule During Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

Hip arthroscopy has become the standard treatment for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement as patients have shown good outcomes and high satisfaction with this intervention. However, capsular management to gain access for intra-articular procedures remains greatly debated. Capsular closure is advocated particularly in the setting of interportal or T-capsulotomy to avoid complications of instability or nonhealing capsule. We introduce a technique for capsular management through a limited periportal capsulotomy during arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. In using dilation of the anterolateral and mid-anterior portals without completion of a full interportal capsulotomy, the stabilizing iliofemoral ligament is preserved. We have found that periportal capsulotomy provides safe and sufficient access to the hip joint without necessitating capsular closure.

Is Hip Arthroscopy Effective in Patients With Combined Excessive Femoral Anteversion and Borderline Dysplasia? A Match-Controlled Study

Background: Appropriate patient selection is critical when hip arthroscopy is considered in the setting of borderline dysplasia (BD). It is presumable that excessive femoral anteversion (EFA) and BD may contraindicate arthroscopy. Hypothesis: Patients with combined EFA and BD (EFABD) demonstrate significantly inferior short-term outcomes after arthroscopic labral preservation and capsular closure when compared with a similar control group with normal lateral coverage and femoral anteversion. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed on patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between April 2010 and November 2014. The EFABD group’s inclusion criteria were BD (lateral center-edge angle, 18°-25°), labral tear, capsular closure, and femoral version ≥20°, as well as preoperative modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale, and visual analog scale. Exclusion criteria were workers’ compensation, preoperative Tönnis grade >1, microfracture, abductor pathology, or previous ipsilateral hip surgery or conditions. Patients in the EFABD group were matched 1:2 to a similar control group with normal coverage and femoral anteversion by age at surgery ± 6 years, sex, body mass index ± 5, acetabular Outerbridge grade (0, 1 vs 2, 3, 4), and iliopsoas fractional lengthening. Results: Sixteen EFABD cases were eligible for inclusion, and 100% follow-up was obtained at ≥2 years postoperatively. Twelve EFABD cases were matched to 24 control cases. Mean femoral version was 22.4° in the EFABD group and 10.2° in the control group (P = .01). Mean lateral center-edge angle was 22.1° in the EFABD group and 31.5° in the control group (P < .0001). Acetabuloplasty was performed significantly more frequently in the control group (P = .0006). No other significant differences were found regarding demographics, findings, procedures, or preoperative scores. At latest follow-up, the EFABD group demonstrated significantly lower mean modified Harris Hip Score (76.1 vs 85.9; P = .005), Nonarthritic Hip Score (74.8 vs 88.5; P < .0001), Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale (58.3 vs 78.4; P = .02), and patient satisfaction (7.1 vs 8.3; P = .005). There were 4 secondary surgical procedures (33.3%) in the EFABD group and 1 (4.2%) in the control group (P = .03). One patient in each group required arthroplasty. Conclusion: Patients treated with arthroscopic labral preservation and capsular closure in the setting of EFABD demonstrated significant improvements from presurgery to latest follow-up. However, their results are significantly inferior when compared with a matched-controlled group. Consideration of periacetabular osteotomy or femoral osteotomy may be warranted in the setting of EFABD to achieve optimal benefit.

Capsular closure positively affects the functionnal outcome of femoroacetabular Impingement treatment using the extracapsular outside-in approach

Purpose To evaluate early clinical outcomes and complication rates of the outside-in extracapsular approach for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and to assess the effect of capsular closure on the functional outcome. Methods A consecutive series of hip arthroscopies performed for surgical treatment of FAI using the Ouside-In approach with minimum 2 years follow-up were assessed. Any complications during early, intermediate or long-term follow were identified and recorded. Linear regression models were used to estimate the influence of capsular closure on the functional outcome. Results Sixty-four hips in 57 patients were analyzed at the time of final follow-up of 34.17 months (range 24 to 53). Functional outcome measurements showed an improvement from the preoperative to the last follow-up: 63.5 ± 11.0 to 88.1 ± 11.2 for mHHS, 63.1 ± 13.8 to 86.4 ± 13.4 for NAHS. All PROs showed a statistically significant improvement at final follow-up compared with preoperative levels. Capsular closure leads to a significantly improved clinical outcome ( P > 0.05). No major complications occurred. One case of postoperative tensor fascia latae atrophy was documented. Conclusion Hip arthroscopy in the management of FAI with an extra-articular starting point (Outside-In) is a safe technique with functional results and postoperative morbidity comparable to previous reported techniques. Side to side capsular closure at the end of the procedure might positively affect the final functional outcome.

Tension-free closure with capsular lengthening in mini posterior total hip replacement.

Choice of the best mini invasive surgical approach for total hip replacement remains a controversial topic. The posterior approach is traditionally associated with a higher dislocation rate and the obligation of postoperative restrictions. Soft tissue repair reduces the risk of dislocation yet, posterior closure it is often challenging because of capsular and external rotator contractures. In this article, an original procedure of capsular lengthening and tension-free closure is described and the results of a retrospective single surgeon series of minimally invasive posterior total hip replacement (THR) with capsular repair are presented. A total of 925 mini posterior total hip replacements performed between 2009 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. 2 original types of capsulorrhaphy to decrease tension of the repaired tissues were employed. Absence of posterior envelope stretch during flexion and internal rotation was confirmed intraoperatively with a dynamic test. No postoperative restrictions were used. Capsular lengthening with 1 of the described techniques was required in over 50% of cases for a tension-free closure. 3 patients dislocated in the 867 reviewed procedures (0.35%), 1 requiring revision for instability (0.11%). This soft tissue repair technique after mini posterior approach THR is technically easy, provides a tension-free closure and a low dislocation rate.

Periacetabular Osteotomy Improves Pain and Function in Patients With Lateral Center-edge Angle Between 18° and 25°, but Are These Hips Really Borderline Dysplastic?

AbstractBackgroundThe treatment of mild or borderline acetabular dysplasia is controversial with surgical options including both arthroscopic labral repair with capsular closure or plication and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). The degree to which improvements in pain and function might be achieved u

Extracapsular local infiltration analgesia in hip arthroscopy patients: a randomized, prospective study.

ABSTRACTHip arthroscopy patients can experience significant post-operative pain. Many strategies to combat this pain have been explored including nerve blocks, which can be costly. An alternative option for pain management is local infiltration analgesia (LIA) which has been studied in hip and knee arthroplasty, but its ability to decrease pain in the setting of hip arthroscopy remains uncertain. A prospective randomized controlled trial of 74 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy at a single medical center was performed. Thirty-seven patients received a 20-ml extracapsular injection of 0.25% bupivacaine-epinephrine under direct arthroscopic visualization after capsular closure while 37 from the control group received no injection. Primary outcome measures were both maximum and discharge numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores while in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). The LIA group had a statistically significant decrease in the maximum PACU NRS score (6.16 versus 7.35, P = 0.009), however this did not reach the level of minimal clinically important difference of 1.5. There was an insignificant difference in discharge PACU pain scores. This is the first randomized controlled trial studying extracapsular LIA in hip arthroscopy. While LIA offers an uncomplicated and low-cost approach to post-operative pain management, this specific technique did not reduce pain to a clinically significant level.

High Rate of Return to Swimming After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

To evaluate patients' ability to return to swimming after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) with capsular closure. Consecutive FAIS patients who had undergone hip arthroscopy for the treatment of FAIS by a single fellowship-trained surgeon were reviewed. The inclusion criteria included patients with a diagnosis of FAIS who self-reported being swimming athletes with a minimum clinical follow-up duration of 2years. For all patients, we assessed demographic data; preoperative physical examination findings, imaging findings, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores including the modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living subscale, Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific subscale, and visual analog scale for pain; and postoperative examination findings and PROs at a minimum of 2years after surgery, including a swimming-specific questionnaire. The study included 26 patients (62% female patients; average age, 31.3 ± 7.2years; average body mass index, 24.2 ± 2.7 kg/m2). Preoperatively, 24 patients (92%) were unable to swim at their preinjury level, and swimming was either decreased or discontinued entirely at an average of 6.0 ± 4.0months before surgery. All 26 patients (100%) returned to swimming at an average of 3.4 ± 1.7months after surgery, including 14 (54%) who returned at a higher level of performance than their preoperative state, 10 (38%) who returned to the same level, and 2 (7%) who returned at a lower level. The ability to return at a higher level of performance was not associated with age (P= .81), sex (P= .62), or body mass index (P= .16). At an average of 31.2 ± 4.95months' follow-up, postoperative PRO scores improved significantly from preoperative values (Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living subscale from 68.5 ± 19.9 to 93.9 ± 5.7, P < .0001; Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific subscale from 44.0 ± 21.0 to 85.2 ± 16, P < .0001; and modified Harris Hip Score from 59.5 ± 12.1 to 94 ± 8.6, P < .0001). The average patient satisfaction level was 93% ± 9%. Recreational and amateur swimmers return to swimming 100% of the time after hip arthroscopy for FAIS, with just over half returning at a higher level, and most of these patients return within 4months after surgery. This information is critical in counseling patients on their expectations with respect to returning to swimming after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. Level IV, case series.

Hip Capsular Management

AbstractDue to both the currently available technology and anatomic constraints of the hip joint, capsulotomy is necessary to perform hip arthroscopy. Proper management of the hip capsule is a crucial component of hip arthroscopy that has evolved with increased awareness that capsular closure during hip arthroscopy reestablishes the normal anatomy of the iliofemoral ligament and thus restores the biomechanical characteristics of the hip joint. This article reviews the biomechanical rationale for hip access and closure, as well as recent clinical studies on patient-reported outcomes with regard to capsular closure. Additionally, capsulotomy techniques including capsulectomy as well as interportal and T-capsulotomy techniques are reviewed, and the authors' preferred technique for capsular management is described. While capsular closure is technically challenging and increases operative time, meticulous closure improves outcomes by reducing postoperative micro- and gross instability.

Short-term and mid-term results of lateral condyle sliding osteotomy in the treatment of valgus total knee arthroplasty: A successful therapy option in Grade 2 valgus total knee arthroplasty

BackgroundDifferent methods exist for deformity correction and ligament balancing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) of valgus knees, the sliding osteotomy being one of them. The objective of the current study was to analyze the clinical and radiological short-term and mid-term results of this technique in a larger series. MethodsBetween June 2007 and May 2014, 98 patients were treated with 98 TKAs and a simultaneous sliding osteotomy. All of them had a Grade 2 fixed valgus deformity (between 10° and 20°). All patients received a mobile-bearing, non-constrained (CR) implant. After prospective inclusion (T1), patients were clinically assessed after one (T2) and 4.5years (±2.1years) (T3), and radiological and Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Society Knee Score (KSS) and the Knee Society Function Score (KSF) were obtained. ResultsAll knees were corrected to a mechanical leg alignment within three degrees. Significant improvement of all scores could be measured at T2 and T3. Seven revisions needed to be performed; three of them were procedure-related. In two of them, a problem of capsular closure occurred, while in one the slided epicondyle dislocated after three months. All other revisions were performed because of non-procedure-related problems (e.g. infection). ConclusionsSliding osteotomy of the lateral condyle is a successful option for the treatment of Grade 2 fixed valgus deformity. Due to this technique, higher constraint could be avoided. The results stayed constant over time. The procedure-related complications need to be kept in mind. Long-term results still need to be awaited.

MP42-02 TUMOR ENUCLEATION: FUNCTIONAL COMPARISON WITH STANDARD PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY

You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Localized: Surgical Therapy IV1 Apr 2018MP42-02 TUMOR ENUCLEATION: FUNCTIONAL COMPARISON WITH STANDARD PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY Wen Dong, Gopal N. Gupta, Robert H. Blackwell, Jitao Wu, Chalairat Suk-Ouichai, Arpeet Shah, Sarah E. Capodice, Marcus L Quek, Elvis Caraballo, Diego Aguilar, Erick Remer, Jianbo Li, Joseph Zabell, Sudhir Isharwal, and Steven C. Campbell Wen DongWen Dong More articles by this author , Gopal N. GuptaGopal N. Gupta More articles by this author , Robert H. BlackwellRobert H. Blackwell More articles by this author , Jitao WuJitao Wu More articles by this author , Chalairat Suk-OuichaiChalairat Suk-Ouichai More articles by this author , Arpeet ShahArpeet Shah More articles by this author , Sarah E. CapodiceSarah E. Capodice More articles by this author , Marcus L QuekMarcus L Quek More articles by this author , Elvis CaraballoElvis Caraballo More articles by this author , Diego AguilarDiego Aguilar More articles by this author , Erick RemerErick Remer More articles by this author , Jianbo LiJianbo Li More articles by this author , Joseph ZabellJoseph Zabell More articles by this author , Sudhir IsharwalSudhir Isharwal More articles by this author , and Steven C. CampbellSteven C. Campbell More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.1309AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Tumor enucleation (TE) optimizes parenchymal preservation and could yield better function than standard partial nephrectomy (SPN). However, data about this are controversial. Our study compares functional outcomes for TE and SPN strategies. METHODS Patients managed with partial nephrectomy (PN) with necessary data for analysis of preservation of ipsilateral parenchymal mass and global GFR from two centers were included. All studies were required <2 months prior and 3-12 months after surgery. Patients with solitary kidney or multifocal tumors were excluded. Ipsilateral vascularized parenchymal mass was estimated from contrast-enhanced CT scans preoperatively and postoperatively. Serum creatinine-based estimates of global GFR were also obtained in the same timeframes. Univariable and multivariable linear regression evaluated factors associated with new baseline global GFR. RESULTS Analysis included 71 TE and 373 SPN. Median preoperative global GFR was comparable for TE and SPN (75mL/min/1.73m2 versus 78mL/min/1.73m2, p=0.6). Median tumor size was 3.0cm for TE and 3.3cm for SPN (p=0.03). Median R.E.N.A.L scores were 7 in both cohorts. For TE, warm and zero ischemia were used in 51% and 49%, respectively. For SPN, warm and cold ischemia were used in 72% and 28%, respectively. Capsular closure was performed in 46% of TE and 100% of SPN (p<0.001). Positive margins were found in 8.5% of TE and 4.8% of SPN (p=0.2). Median ipsilateral vascularized parenchymal mass preserved was 95% (IQR=91-100) for TE and 84% (IQR=76-92) for SPN (p<0.001). Median global GFR preserved was 101% (IQR=93-111) and 89% (IQR=81-96) for TE and SPN, respectively (p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, resection strategy, preoperative GFR, and vascularized parenchymal mass preserved all associated significantly with new baseline global GFR (all p<0.001). Limitations include retrospective design and lack of resection outcome data. CONCLUSIONS Our analysis suggests that TE has potential to maximally preserve parenchymal mass compared to SPN and may provide optimized functional recovery. Further investigation will be required to evaluate the clinical significance of these findings. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e536 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Wen Dong More articles by this author Gopal N. Gupta More articles by this author Robert H. Blackwell More articles by this author Jitao Wu More articles by this author Chalairat Suk-Ouichai More articles by this author Arpeet Shah More articles by this author Sarah E. Capodice More articles by this author Marcus L Quek More articles by this author Elvis Caraballo More articles by this author Diego Aguilar More articles by this author Erick Remer More articles by this author Jianbo Li More articles by this author Joseph Zabell More articles by this author Sudhir Isharwal More articles by this author Steven C. Campbell More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Superior Clinical Outcomes with Capsular Closure versus Non-Closure in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair

Objectives:Controversy still exists on closing the capsule following hip arthroscopy. It is unclear if capsular closure at the end of hip arthroscopy results in better clinical outcomes compared to non-closure. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes in patients who had a closed capsule to those without a closed capsule following hip arthroscopic labral repair by a single surgeon.Methods:Patients who did not have capsular closure were identified by reviewing arthroscopy video (non-closure group). Fifty consecutive patients without capsular closure were matched with fifty patients who had capsular closure. All patients underwent primary hip arthroscopy and labral repair. The primary patient-reported outcome measure was Hip Outcome Score(HOS)-ADL. Secondary outcome measures included the modified Harris hip score(MHHS), HOS-Sport, WOMAC, general health, and patient satisfaction with outcome. Patients with lateral center edge angle less than 25º were excluded.Results:There were 23 females and 27 males with an average age of 36 years (range:14 to 77) in each group. The average lateral center edge angle was 34º (range, 27 to 48) in both groups. The alpha angle was 68º (range, 40 to 134) in the non-closure group and 70º (range, 41 to 98) in the closure group. No patient had microfractures at the time of surgery. The average follow-up time was 5 years (non-closure group range: 3-10; closure group range 3-9). Eight patients (16%) in the non-closure group required total hip arthroplasty(THA), while 4 patients (8%) in the closure group required THA. Six patients in the non-closure group and 3 patients in the closure group required revision hip arthroscopy. Of those patients who did not require revision or THA, there was a significant difference in the HOS ADL score and the secondary outcome measures (see table). Capsular closure resulted in superior clinical outcomes compared to non-closure.Conclusion:There were twice as many conversion to THA and twice as many hip arthroscopy revisions in patients undergoing hip arthroscopic labral repair without capsular closure compared to those with closure. In addition, the closure group showed significantly higher outcomes scores compared to the non-closure at 5-year follow-up time.Mid-term follow-up outcome scores in closure and non-closure groupOutcome scoreWithout closureWith closurep valueSF12 PCS50.0 SD 1054.2 SD 5.90.04SF12MCS50.9 SD 9.754.3 SD 7.30.11HOS ADL83.9 SD 1490.4 SD 8.80.02HOS SPORT72.4 SD 2686 SD 180.006WOMAC11.6 SD 16.27.1 SD 8.40.067Modified Harris Hip Score81.5 SD 16.690.1 SD 110.016Patient Satisfaction with Outcome (median, range)9.5 (1 to 10)10 (3 to 10)ns

Multicentre study on capsular closure versus non-capsular closure during hip arthroscopy in Danish patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI): protocol for a randomised controlled trial

IntroductionHip arthroscopy has become a standard procedure in the treatment of hip joint pain not related to osteoarthritis or dysplasia in the young and active patient. There has been increasing...