Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy Research Articles

Periacetabular osteotomy with andwithout concomitant arthroscopy: a systematic review ofevidence onpost-operative activity levels andreturn to sport.

The purpose of this systematic review is to (i) compare post-operative activity levels after periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) versus PAO + HA (concomitant PAO and hip arthroscopy) using patient-reported outcomes that specifically assess activity and sports participation [Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Sport and Recreation subscale (HOOS-SR), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score, Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS)] and (ii) compare post-operative return to sport (RTS) data between PAO and PAO + HA groups. A systematic review of literature was conducted on 1 June 2023, utilizing PubMed, Cochrane and Embase (OVID). Articles were screened for inclusion using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Twenty-six out of 1610 articles metall inclusion criteria, without meeting any exclusion criteria. In the 12 studies containing only subjects who underwent PAO alone, 11 demonstrated an average score improvement in UCLA, HOOS-SR or HOS-SSS post-operatively (P < 0.05). In the three studies containing subjects who underwent PAO with concomitant HA, significant improvements were seen in the HOS-SS and UCLA scores (P < 0.05). In the five studies that directly compared UCLA, HOS-SSS and HOOS-SSS scores between PAO groups and PAO + HA groups, all demonstrated statistically significant improvement post-operatively (P < 0.05). The rate of RTS ranged from 63% to 90.8% among PAO studies and was found to be 81% in the single PAO + HA study that assessed RTS. When performed in patients with intra-articular pathology, concomitant PAO + HA may provide similar sport-related outcomes to PAO alone in patients without intra-articular pathology.

Favorable and Durable Outcomes at 10-Year Follow-Up After Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair With Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy

To evaluate 10-year patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores following endoscopic surgery for gluteus medius partial and full-thickness tears with concomitant hip arthroscopy for labral tears and/or femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Prospectively collected data on patients followed for a minimum of 10 years after endoscopic gluteus medius repair with concomitant hip arthroscopy performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with preoperative and 10-year follow-up for the following PROs were included: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for pain. There were 13 patients eligible for inclusion, 11 (84.6%) of whom had 10-year follow up, with a mean of 127.6 months (range: 120.0-140.2 months). The group consisted of 10 females (90.9%) and one male (9.1%) with a mean age at surgery of 60.1 years (range: 46.2-74.8 years). PRO scores improved from preoperative to 10-year follow-up as follows: mHHS from 60.4 to 88.0 (P= .011); NAHS from 50.1 to 90.6 (P < .001); HOS-SS from 37.5 to 85.1 (P= .001); and VAS from 4.8 to 1.2 (P= .006). Mean patient satisfaction rating was 8.3. Patients achieved PASS and MCID for mHHS and HOS-SSS at a rate of 81.8%. There was no significant decline in PROs or satisfaction between 2, 5, and 10 years postoperatively. All patients underwent concomitant hip arthroscopy and labral treatment (debridement or repair). One patient, who had arthroscopic findings of acetabular and femoral outerbridge grade 4 lesions, subsequently underwent total hip arthroplasty; however, the GM was assessed during the THA, and it was verified that the repair was intact. There were no clinical failures, secondary operations, or complications. Endoscopic repair of gluteus medius tears is a safe procedure with favorable and durable long-term outcomes at minimum 10-year follow-up. Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Endoscopic Tendon Compression Bridge Technique for Repair of Partial-Thickness Gluteus Medius Tears With Concomitant Arthroscopy for Labral Tears: Minimum 2-Year Outcomes With Benchmark Control Group

Background: The transtendinous technique has been used to treat partial-thickness gluteus medius tears in the setting of concomitant arthroscopy for labral tears. The tendon compression bridge technique for gluteus medius repair has been developed as an alternative method, providing several advantages; however, comparative studies between the 2 techniques are lacking in the literature. Purpose: (1) To evaluate the short-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of the tendon compression bridge technique and (2) to compare these findings with short-term PROs of the transtendinous technique. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were prospectively collected on patients who were followed for a minimum of 2 years after an endoscopic tendon compression bridge procedure for gluteus medius repair in the setting of concomitant hip arthroscopy for labral tears. The following PROs were collected preoperatively and postoperatively: modified Harris Hip Score, Nonarthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale, visual analog scale score for pain, and the International Hip Outcome Tool. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Patient Acceptable Symptom State, minimal clinically important difference, and maximum outcome improvement satisfaction threshold. Patients were propensity matched 1:1 to a cohort that underwent gluteus medius repair using the endoscopic transtendinous technique with concomitant hip arthroscopy. Results: A total of 48 hips (48 patients) that met inclusion criteria (age, 53.3 ± 9.8 years; 92% female; body mass index, 26.7 ± 4.6), with a mean follow-up of 38.5 ± 15.7 months, were matched to 48 hips (46 patients) that underwent gluteus medius repair using the transtendinous technique. Both groups demonstrated significant improvement from preoperative scores to latest follow-up (P < .05). Mean magnitude of improvement and latest follow-up scores were not significantly different between the tendon compression bridge group and the transtendinous group, and the groups demonstrated similar favorable rates of achieving Minimal Clinically Important Difference (79% vs 79%, respectively), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (73% vs 73%, respectively), and Maximum Outcome Improvement Satisfaction threshold (65% vs 58%, respectively) for modified Harris Hip Score (P > .05). Patient satisfaction between groups was similar (8.1 ± 2.2 vs 7.7 ± 2.7, respectively) (P = .475). Conclusion: At minimum 2-year follow-up, the endoscopic tendon compression bridge technique for partial-thickness gluteus medius tears, when performed with concomitant hip arthroscopy, was associated with significant improvement in functional outcomes. These postoperative results were comparable with those of a matched cohort that underwent the endoscopic transtendinous technique for partial-thickness gluteus medius tears, suggesting that the tendon compression bridge technique for gluteus medius repair is an effective treatment option for partial-thickness gluteus medius tears.

Decision Making in Combined Hip Arthroscopy and Femoral Derotational Osteotomy Surgeries

Background: Femoral version abnormalities can contribute to intra-articular hip pathology. Combined hip arthroscopy with femoral derotational osteotomy (FDRO) has been shown to successfully treat those with intra-articular hip pathology with excessive anteversion or retroversion of the femur. Indications: We describe the technique for combined hip arthroscopy and FDRO in patients with symptomatic intra-articular hip pathology in the setting of excessive anteversion or retroversion of the femur. Technique Description: Hip arthroscopy is performed using standard anterolateral, modified mid-anterior, and distal anterolateral accessory portals. The labrum is repaired using a narrow diameter suture. Femoroplasty is performed with utilization of fluoroscopic imaging to assess resection. Dynamic flexion is performed as a final check of adequacy of resection. Capsular closure is performed in all cases. After hip arthroscopy, the patient is repositioned on a radiolucent table. A piriformis start point is obtained with a guide pin followed by standard opening reaming and ball-tipped guidewire placement. A femoral osteotomy is made just proximal to the isthmus and made through a lateral approach to the femur. Two K-wires are placed distal and proximal to the osteotomy site. A goniometer is then used to measure rotation. A drill is used to perforate the cortex circumferentially at the osteotomy site. After standard reaming, a sagittal saw is then used to start the osteotomy cut followed by an osteotome. An intramedullary nail is inserted over a ball-tipped guidewire while rotational reduction is assessed from the foot of the operating table. Distal interlocking screws are placed, and the nail is backslapped to create compression at the osteotomy site prior to placing proximal interlocking screws. Results: Recent studies show improved hip outcome scores in patients who undergo concomitant hip arthroscopy and FDRO for symptomatic abnormal femoral version. Discussion/Conclusion: Identifying patients who would benefit from concomitant surgeries requires thorough preoperative evaluation. Correct identification and treatment of these patients leads to improved outcomes. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

Ten-Year Outcomes Following Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair With Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy

Ten-Year Outcomes Following Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair With Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy

Outcomes After Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy and Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Systematic Review.

Despite several studies' reports on outcomes of concomitant hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), there is a paucity of aggregate data in the literature. To evaluate outcomes and survivorship after concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO. Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. The PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were searched in April 2022 using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The following keywords were used: (hip OR femoroacetabular impingement) AND (arthroscopy OR arthroscopic) AND (periacetabular osteotomy or rotational osteotomy) AND (outcomes OR follow-up). Of 270 articles initially identified, 10 studies were ultimately included. The following information was recorded for each study if available: publication information; study design; study period; patient characteristics; follow-up time; indications for hip arthroscopy; patient-reported outcomes (PROs); rates of secondary hip preservation surgeries; and rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA). Survivorship was defined as nonconversion to THA. The study periods for the 10 included articles ranged from 2001 to 2018. Three studies were level 3 evidence, and 7 studies were level 4 evidence. This review included 553 hips with a mean follow-up of 1 to 12.8 years. All 10 studies listed dysplasia as an indication for surgery. Of 9 studies that reported PRO scores, 7 reported significant improvement after surgery. Studies with a <5-year follow-up reported conversion to THA rates of 0% to 3.4% and overall secondary surgery rates of 0% to 10.3%. Similarly, studies with >5-year follow-up reported conversion to THA rates of 0% to 3% and overall secondary surgery rates of 0% to 10%. Patients who underwent concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO reported favorable outcomes, with 7 of the 9 studies that provided PRO scores indicating significant preoperative to postoperative improvement.

Managing Borderline Dysplasia: It Can Take More Than Just a Periacetabular Osteotomy: Commentary on an article by Jeffrey J. Nepple, MD, et al.: "Outcomes of Periacetabular Osteotomy for Borderline Acetabular Dysplasia".

Commentary Nepple et al. report the outcomes of a single experienced surgeon treating patients with borderline hip dysplasia from 2010 to 2020. The article correctly points out that a majority of clinical reports of outcomes of treatment for patients with borderline hip dysplasia used arthroscopy without periacetabular osteotomy (PAO)1. This article represents an important contribution documenting the outcomes of treatment correcting structural causes of instability with or without arthroscopy. A previous series of PAOs, including cases from the senior author, used different criteria (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] of 15° to 25°) to define mild dysplasia2, and those outcomes are not directly comparable with those in the current article, in which an LCEA of 18° to 25° was used to describe borderline dysplasia. The results in the current article demonstrate clinical success in 148 of 156 hips in patients undergoing primary surgery. The article provides important data on radiographic parameters for correction of acetabular dysplasia. The article does not provide a detailed analysis of preoperative femoral neck morphology or femoral torsion. However, several points regarding this clinical series of patients with borderline hip dysplasia are instructive. The authors point out that “A comprehensive assessment of the hip … is critical to informing an accurate diagnosis. Currently, there remain no clear clinical guidelines to differentiate between fundamental mechanical diagnoses (impingement compared with instability) and definitively guide treatment selection.” In other words, the clinical assessment of the patient presentation plays an important role in discriminating between the underlying pathologic mechanisms of impingement or instability. In the entire cohort of 186 hips in 178 patients, only 21 hips underwent an isolated PAO. The majority of treated hips required addition of a concomitant hip arthroscopy to the PAO as treatment for labral or articular cartilage pathology (130 of 186 hips). Similarly, 120 hips required a femoral osteoplasty to treat impingement at the time of the PAO. These 2 important observations emphasize the importance of clinicians and learners who are interested in treating patients with this type of hip pathology gaining experience in evaluating patients with instability as well as patients with impingement. The ability to differentiate instability from impingement depends in part on clinical exposure to the presentation of these types of hip pathology. Of note, neither the evaluation nor treatment of the young adult hip is addressed in the latest iteration of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Orthopaedic Surgery Milestones3. This study does not provide an assessment with a control group with similar labral and intra-articular pathology treated without arthroscopy. Therefore, it is unclear whether hip arthroscopy with labral refixation and chondral interventions as performed in this cohort would be required to achieve similar outcomes. A previous study indicated that not treating femoroacetabular impingement at the time of the PAO was associated with poorer long-term outcomes4. However, the reported data in the current study indicate that hip arthroscopy at the time of the PAO has not adversely impacted results. Nepple et al. also point out the adverse impact that a previous unsuccessful hip arthroscopy has on the outcomes in patients with borderline hip dysplasia. The majority of these previous arthroscopies were not performed by the senior author. It is not clear whether these patients had concomitant impingement with borderline dysplasia and developed instability after arthroscopy, or they had clinical instability that had been misdiagnosed as impingement initially. There are many reports detailing successful treatment of femoroacetabular impingement arthroscopically in the setting of borderline dysplasia1. However, clearly a hip arthroscopy that leaves the patient with symptomatic hip instability has an adverse impact on outcome after structural correction with PAO. Finally, the diversity of treatments required to provide successful outcomes in the cohort of patients studied by Nepple et al. provides some evidence for the need for personalized medicine in the care of young patients with hip pathology. As with all such clinical series, the reported results are a benchmark for all clinicians to aspire toward. The results in this article represent the work of an experienced surgeon selectively managing multiple aspects of hip pathology to optimize outcomes in this defined cohort of patients.

Addition of Pericapsular Nerve Group and Transversus Abdominis Plane Blocks Significantly Reduces Opioid Use in Patients Undergoing Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy and Periacetabular Osteotomy.

Previous studies have evaluated the effect of the pericapsular nerve group block for hip arthroscopy and the transverse abdominis plane block for periacetabular osteotomy and have shown decreased narcotic consumption in both groups. No published study has evaluated the effectiveness of combining the blocks when performing hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy under the same general anesthesia. It was hypothesized that patients treated for hip dysplasia with hip arthroscopy and concomitant periacetabular osteotomy using a pericapsular nerve group block, transverse abdominis plane block, and general anesthesia would have decreased postoperative pain and require less narcotic consumption than those undergoing the procedure with general anesthetic alone. Methods:A single surgeon performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing concomitant hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy between 11/2020 and 6/2021. Fifteen consecutive patients undergoing the procedure with a general anesthetic alone (no-block group) were compared to 15 patients undergoing the same procedure with a combined pericapsular nerve group block, transverse abdominis plane block, and general anesthetic (block group).Hip arthroscopy was performed utilizing a post-free technique, and a rectus sparing approach was used for the periacetabular osteotomy. The nerve blocks were performed by multiple anesthesiologists using previously published methods. Operating room time, length of stay, visual analog scale pain scores, and total narcotic consumption in morphine milliequivalents were analyzed. Groups were compared using the chi-squared test for non-continuous demographic variables and a two-tailed t-test for continuous variables utilizing Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA), p-value set at 0.05 for significance. Results:The no-block group consisted of 14 females and one male, while the block group was all females. No significant differences were observed between age, sex, BMI, surgery time, length of stay, or procedures performed, p>0.05. The maximal visual analog scale score in the post-anesthesia care unit was 8 ± 1.3 vs. 7 ± 1.9 in the no-block vs. block groups, respectively, p=0.15. The average hospital floor visual analog scale score was 5.7 ± 1.3 vs. 4.8 ± 1.3 in the no-block vs. block groups, respectively, p=0.07. Total pain medications required were 217.6 ± 54.6 vs. 154 ± 41.9 morphine milliequivalents in the no-block vs. block groups, respectively, p=0.001. No complications were reported in either group, and no patient in the block group demonstrated motor nerve palsy or postoperative fall. This study demonstrated that patients undergoing combined hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia who had pericapsular nerve group, transverse abdominal plane block, and general anesthesia required fewer narcotics in the first 24 hours after surgery compared to those who had general anesthesia alone.

Athletes Undergoing Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy and Periacetabular Osteotomy Demonstrate Greater Than 80% Return-to-Sport Rate at 2-Year Minimum Follow-Up

To report minimum 2-year follow-up patient-reported outcomes and return-to-sport (RTS) rates in athletes undergoing concomitant hip arthroscopy and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) to treat acetabular dysplasia and intra-articular pathologies such as cam deformity and labral tears. We reviewed the data of consecutive athletes undergoing concomitant primary hip arthroscopy and PAO for acetabular dysplasia and cam deformity from November 2010 to December 2018. Patients were included in the study if they had the following preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative scores: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS). The percentage of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference was recorded, in addition to RTS status. A total of 29 athletes (29 hips) were included, with a mean follow-up time of 34.1 ± 7.9 months, mean age of 26.0 ± 8.7 years, and mean body mass index of 23.7 ± 3.4. These athletes showed significant improvements in the mHHS, NAHS, and HOS-SSS from baseline to latest follow-up (P < .001). The minimal clinically important difference was achieved at high rates for the mHHS (82.8%), NAHS (86.2%), and HOS-SSS (79.3%). Athletes who attempted to RTS successfully returned at a rate of 81.8%. Athletes undergoing concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO showed significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes at minimum 2-year follow-up and had an RTS rate of 81.8%. Level IV, retrospective case series.

Short-term Outcomes of Concomitant Femoral Derotation Osteotomy and Hip Arthroscopy.

The goal of this study is to report the short-term outcomes of concomitant hip arthroscopy and femoral derotational osteotomy (FRO) to treat femoral malrotation and intra-articular pathology. Data were retrospectively reviewed for patients undergoing concomitant hip arthroscopy and FRO between March 2013 and January 2017. Patients were included if they had a minimum of 1 year of follow-up for modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) score, 12-item Short Form Health Survey Physical component and Mental component (SF-12 P and SF-12 M, respectively) scores, Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey Physical and Mental (VR-12 P and VR-12 M, respectively) scores, visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and patient satisfaction ratings. Rates for meeting the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) were also recorded. Nine hips were included, and mean follow-up was 36.9 months. Mean preoperative femoral version was 33.0°. Patients underwent 1 or more concomitant procedures, such as labral treatment, capsular plication, acetabuloplasty, or femoroplasty. At latest follow-up, significant improvement was seen for mHHS, NAHS, HOS-SSS, and VAS score. Additionally, rates of meeting the PASS for mHHS, iHOT-12 score, and HOS-SSS were 100%, 88.9%, and 55.6%, respectively. Rates of achieving MCID for mHHS and HOS-SSS were 77.8% and 66.7%, respectively. One hip required revision derotational osteotomy to treat overcorrection, and 3 hips underwent secondary surgery for hardware removal. Concomitant hip arthroscopy and FRO may yield improved outcomes for patients with concurrent intra-articular pathology and excessive femoral anteversion. Considering that no major complications were diagnosed, this procedure is also relatively safe. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(6):e739-e746.].

Short-term patient-reported outcomes following concomitant hip arthroscopy and the endoscopic modified shelf procedure for the treatment of acetabular dysplasia and intra-articular pathology.

The shelf procedure is a treatment of acetabular dysplasia, with the aim of increasing weight-bearing acetabular coverage. Although several shelf techniques have been described, the endoscopic procedure with concomitant hip arthroscopy is a new, less invasive alternative. Outcomes following this procedure are scarce. The purpose of this study was to report short-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following concomitant hip arthroscopy and endoscopic modified shelf procedure in the setting of acetabular dysplasia and labral tears. Patients that met extraordinarily selective surgical indications and underwent the abovementioned surgery between February 2016 and October 2019 and had minimum 1-year follow-up were included. There were five females with a mean age of 40.18 ± 5.05 years and follow-up of 21.55 ± 8.68 months. The lateral center-edge angle increased from 15.80° to 23.20° (P = 0.003), and vertical center-edge angle increased from 16.60° to 23.60° (P < 0.001). The Tönnis angle decreased from 15.40° to 3.74° (P < 0.001). The alpha angle decreased from 58.46° to 40.70° (P < 0.001). PROs demonstrated significant improvement at latest follow-up (modified Harris Hip Score, P = 0.042; Non-Arthritic Hip Score, P < 0.001; Hip Outcome Score–Sports Specific Subscale, P = 0.035; Visual Analog Scale, P < 0.001; International Hip Outcome Tool-12, P = 0.043), and satisfaction was 8.60 ± 0.89. No secondary surgeries were reported. Concomitant hip arthroscopy and endoscopic modified shelf procedure appears to be a safe and effective procedure for patients with acetabular dysplasia and labral tears yielding favorable outcomes and satisfaction at short-term follow-up.

A comparison of 6-month outcomes between periacetabular osteotomy with concomitant hip arthroscopy to isolated hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement.

To compare early outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) with concomitant hip arthroscopy to isolated hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and chondrolabral pathology using patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Consecutive patients scheduled for PAO with concomitant hip arthroscopy (PAO + HA) or isolated hip arthroscopy (HA) between the ages of 15 and 30years old were prospectively included in the study. Based on power analysis, subjects were recruited until there were 22 subjects in the PAO + HA group. These subjects were then gender matched to the HA group. The PROMIS, with six subscales and two global health measures, were completed during preoperative and 6-month follow-up visits. One-way ANOVA was performed to compare intake information of age, symptom duration, body mass index, and Beighton scores as well as preoperative and 6-month postoperative PROMIS scores between the PAO + HA and HA. 22 consecutive subjects undergoing PAO + HA were all females (average age 20.0years) and matched to 22 consecutive females (average age 22.6) in the HA group. ANOVA did not find a significant difference between the two groups when comparing intact information, with exception of age (p = 0.04). A significant difference was also not identified (p ≥ 0.05) between the two groups on preoperative or 6-month postoperative PROMIS scores. The largest difference in 6-month postoperative scores between the two groups was 4.4 points on physical function subscale. Outcomes at 6months were not significantly different when comparing PAO + HA to HA for FAI and chondrolabral pathology in females under 30years of age. The more extensive surgery with a prolonged protective period associated with PAO do not seem to negatively impact outcomes at 6months when compared to HA. These finding support the use of PAO + HA, particularly if the patient and/or surgeon were concerned about prolonged disability, metal health issues, and/or higher pain levels that might be associated with the PAO procedure.

Periacetabular osteotomy with concomitant hip arthroscopy: A case series with 24 months minimum follow-up.

To describe patient-reported outcomes, radiological results, and revision to total hip replacement in patients with hip dysplasia that underwent periacetabular osteotomy as isolated treatment or concomitant with hip arthroscopy. Case series study. Between 2014 and 2017, patients were included if they complained of hip pain and had a lateral center-edge angle ≤ of 20°. Exclusion criteria included an in-maturate skeleton, age of 40 or older, previous hip surgery, concomitant connective tissue related disease, and Tönnis osteoarthritis grade ≥ 1. All patients were studied before surgery with an anteroposterior pelvis radiograph, false-profile radiograph, and magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic resonance imaging was used to assess intraarticular lesions, and if a labral or chondral injury was found, concomitant hip arthroscopy was performed. The non-parametric median test for paired data was used to compare radiological measures (anterior and lateral center-edge angle, Tönnis angle, and extrusion index) after and before surgery. Survival analysis was performed using revision to total hip arthroplasty as a failure. Kaplan Meier curve was estimated. The data were processed using Stata. A total of 15 consecutive patients were included; 14 (93%) were female patients. The median follow-up was 3.5 years (range, 2 to 8 years). The median age was 20 (range 13 to 32). Lateral center-edge angle, Tönnis angle, and extrusion index correction achieved statistical significance. Seven patients (47%) underwent concomitant hip arthroscopy; three of them (47%) were bilateral (10 hips). The labrum was repaired in six cases (60%). Three patients (15%) required revision with hip arthroplasty, and no hip arthroscopy-related complications are reported in this series. To perform a hip arthroscopy concomitant with periacetabular osteotomy did not affect the acetabular correction. Nowadays, due to a lack of conclusive evidence, a case by case decision seems more appropriate to design a comprehensive treatment.

Technique for Intraoperative Neuromonitoring During Periacetabular Osteotomy After Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy

Intraoperative neurologic injury during periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for the treatment of symptomatic acetabular dysplasia is a major complication that can lead to permanent disability and limit the benefit of correcting the acetabular dysplasia. Current literature reflects the evolution of hip-preservation surgery for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia to include hip arthroscopy to address the intra-articular abnormalities, including labral tears, chondral lesions, and femoral cam morphology. A growing number of young hip surgeons and surgeon teams are subscribing to this approach and now performing concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO. The value of intraoperative neuromonitoring cannot be understated, both in terms of surgeon confidence as well as patient safety, particularly during the learning curve of PAO, with or without hip arthroscopy. We present our current technique for the application of neuromonitoring to allow free mobility of the operative leg and continuous monitoring during PAO. This reproducible technique allows the use of nonsterile neuromonitoring to be used through a sterile conduit, positioned to allow free mobility of the operative extremity and performance of the PAO. We believe this technique provides additional safety benefit and increases awareness regarding neurologic compromise, particularly for the low-volume PAO surgeon or during the procedural learning curve.

Periacetabular osteotomy with or without arthroscopic management in patients with hip dysplasia: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BackgroundHip dysplasia is one of the most common causes of hip arthritis. Its incidence is estimated to be between 3.6 and 12.8% (Canadian Institute for Health Information, Hip and knee replacements in Canada, 2017–2018: Canadian joint replacement registry annual report, 2019; Jacobsen and Sonne-Holm, Rheumatology 44:211–8, 2004). The Periacetabular Osteotomy (PAO) has been used successfully for over 30 years (Gosvig et al., J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:1162–9, 2010), but some patients continue to exhibit symptoms post-surgery (Wyles et al., Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:336–50, 2017). A hip arthroscopy, performed using a small camera, allows surgeons to address torn cartilage inside the hip joint. Although both procedures are considered standard of care treatment options, it is unknown whether the addition of hip arthroscopy improves patient outcomes compared to a PAO alone. To delay or prevent future joint replacement surgeries, joint preservation surgery is recommended for eligible patients. While previous studies found an added cost to perform hip arthroscopies, the cost-effectiveness to Canadian Health care system is not known.MethodsPatients randomized to the experimental group will undergo central compartment hip arthroscopy prior to completion of the PAO. Patients randomized to the control group will undergo isolated PAO. Patient-reported quality of life will be the primary outcome used for comparison between the two treatment groups as measured by The International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) (Saberi Hosnijeh et al., Arthritis Rheum 69:86–93, 2017). Secondary outcomes will include the four-square step test and sit-to-stand (validated in patients with pre-arthritic hip pain) and hip-specific symptoms and impairment using the HOOS; global health assessment will be compared using the PROMIS Global 10 Score; health status will be assessed using the EQ-5D-5L and EQ VAS questionnaires (Ganz et al., Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:264–72, 2008) pre- and post-operatively. In addition, operative time, hospital length of stay, adverse events, and health services utilization will be collected. A sub-group of patients (26 in each group) will receive a T1rho MRI before and after surgery to study changes in cartilage quality over time. A cost-utility analysis will be performed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with the intervention.DiscussionWe hypothesize that (1) concomitant hip arthroscopy at the time of PAO to address central compartment pathology will result in clinically important improvements in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) versus PAO alone, that (2) additional costs associated with hip arthroscopy will be offset by greater clinical improvements in this group, and that (3) combined hip arthroscopy and PAO will prove to be a cost-effective procedure.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03481010. Registered on 6 March 2020. Protocol version: version 3.

Full-Thickness Gluteus Medius Tears With or Without Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy: Minimum 2-Year Outcomes Using an Open Approach and Contemporary Tendon Repair Techniques.

Background:Gluteus medius (GM) tears are a well-established source of pain and disability. An open approach has been recognized with complete full-thickness and large GM tears, yet the current literature provides few reports on outcomes for this specific situation.Purpose:To report and analyze minimum 2-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from patients who underwent open GM repair in the setting of a full-thickness tear with or without concomitant hip arthroscopy through use of contemporary tendon repair techniques.Study Design:Case series; Level of evidence, 4.Methods:Prospectively collected data were retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent hip preservation surgery and total hip arthroplasty (THA) between April 2008 and May 2017. Patients were included in this study if they underwent open repair of GM full-thickness tears. The exclusion criteria were incomplete follow-up, workers’ compensation status, repair regarding size and pattern of the GM, open repair of partial GM tear, open repair with allograft or autograft augmentation, and/or additional gluteus maximus transfer. Pre- and postoperative PROs for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain and satisfaction were recorded. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.Results:A total of 36 patients were included, of whom 12 received concomitant hip arthroscopy for intra-articular procedures. The mean ± SD age, body mass index, and follow-up time were 65.18 ± 12.69 years, 28.97 ± 4.95 kg/m2, and 40.8 ± 26.19 months, respectively. At minimum 2-year follow-up, the following outcome measures improved significantly: mHHS (from 54.72 ± 15.89 to 73.12 ± 19.47; P < .0001), NAHS (from 56.05 ± 12.47 to 75.22 ± 19.15; P < .0001); HOS-SSS (from 20.30 ± 20.21 to 44.23 ± 35.85; P < .0001), and VAS (from 4.95 ± 2.70 to 2.67 ± 2.81; P < .0001). There was 1 (2.8%) conversion to THA at 48 months after the index procedure.Conclusion:Patients who underwent open repairs in the setting of full-thickness GM tears via contemporary tendon repair techniques, with or without concomitant hip arthroscopy, achieved favorable results in several PRO scores at minimum 2-year follow-up.

Long-Term Results of Periacetabular Rotational Osteotomy Concomitantly With Arthroscopy in Adult Acetabular Dysplasia

BackgroundAlthough the long-term results of periacetabular osteotomy in acetabular dysplasia have been well documented, there is paucity in reports on the long-term outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy with simultaneous hip arthroscopy. This study aimed to assess the cumulative 10-year outcomes of periacetabular rotational osteotomy with concomitant hip arthroscopy. MethodsThrough an arthroscopic procedure, the status of the labrum was assessed, and torn labrum was debrided. Evaluations on survival from conversion to total hip arthroplasty and success in radiographic and clinical long-term results were completed in 39 hips (36 patients). Acetabular parameters (center-edge angle, Sharp angle, acetabular-head index, and head lateralization index), Tönnis grades on radiograph, Harris Hip Score, and range of motion of the hip were evaluated. Survivorship analyses were evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier method. ResultsThirty-eight hips (97.4%, 95% confidence interval 0.832-0.996) were preserved for 12.8 ± 1.7 years on average, and only 1 hip was converted to total hip arthroplasty at 7.8 years. All the acetabular parameters were improved (P < .001). Twenty-eight hips (71.8%) showed unchanged or improved Tönnis grades at the latest follow-up. The average Harris Hip Score was significantly better than the preoperative value (P < .001), and range of motion was not significantly different until the latest follow-up. ConclusionSufficient acetabular reorientation, such as periacetabular rotational osteotomy, with concomitant arthroscopic debridement showed successful long-term outcomes for acetabular dysplasia in adults.

Outcomes of Periacetabular Osteotomy with Concomitant Arthroscopy for the Treatment of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip. Minimum Five-Year Follow-Up

To report minimum 5-year follow-up results of concomitant hip arthroscopy followed by periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) to treat acetabular dysplasia and intra-articular pathology, such as femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and labral tears.

Single Table Concomitant Post-Less Hip Arthroscopy Combined with Periacetabular Osteotomy for Hip Dysplasia

It has been well established that both arthroscopic and open hip preservation techniques can result in improved patient outcomes and interrupt the natural history of hip disease. Traditionally, hip arthroscopy has been used to address central and peripheral compartment disease consisting of labral tears, impingement morphology and cartilage pathology. The periacetabular osteotomy has been the most used treatment for hip instability caused by inadequate acetabular coverage of the femoral head or dysplasia. With failures of periacetabular osteotomy linked to postoperative impingement and the high incidence of intra-articular pathology in the dysplastic hip, there has been a great interest in combing hip arthroscopy with the periacetabular osteotomy. Here, we describe a technique for a single table, single drape, postless combined hip arthroscopy, and periacetabular osteotomy.

Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy With Concomitant Periacetabular Osteotomy, Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

To report minimum 5-year follow-up results of concomitant hip arthroscopy followed by periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) to treat acetabular dysplasia and intra-articular pathology, such as femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and labral tears. Data were prospectively collected from October 2010 to December 2012. Patients were included in this study if they underwent concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO and if they had preoperative scores documented for the following measures: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and pain on a visual analog scale (VAS). Patients who underwent reverse PAO to address acetabular retroversion were excluded. Follow-up was considered complete with these outcomes collected after surgery, as well as the abbreviated International Hip Outcome Tool and patient satisfaction on a 0-10 scale. Significance was set at P= .05. Sixteen patients were eligible, all of whom had complete follow-up at a minimum of 5years after surgery. There were 13 female subjects. The average age of the patients was 23.5 ± 6.8years (range, 12.3-35.3years), and the average body mass index was 24.3 ± 5.6 (range, 14.8-34.2). The mean lateral center-edge angle increased from 14.2° to 31.8° (P < .0001), and the anterior center-edge angle increased from 11.9° to 28.6° (P < .0001). The Tönnis angle of acetabular inclination decreased from 19.3° to 2.6° (P < .0001). The alpha angle decreased from 55.7° to 41.0° (P < .0001). All preoperative radiographs were Tönnis ≤1, and there was no progression of arthritis in radiographs taken at the latest clinical visit. All patient-reported outcomes scores demonstrated significant improvement from preoperative baseline to the minimum 5-year follow-up scores (mHHS, P < .001; NAHS, P < .001; HOS-SSS, P= .001). The VAS score decreased from a preoperative mean of 5.8 to 3.1 at the latest follow-up (P= .007). No conversion to total hip arthroplasty was reported. Concomitant hip arthroscopy and PAO appears to be a safe and effective procedure with favorable mid-term outcomes that are durable compared to the short-term. Level IV, case series.