• Arthroscopy · Jun 2019

    Comparative Study

    Midterm Outcomes Following Repair of Capsulotomy Versus Nonrepair in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement With Labral Repair.

    • Ioanna K Bolia, Lorenzo Fagotti, Karen K Briggs, and Marc J Philippon.
    • Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, U.S.A.
    • Arthroscopy. 2019 Jun 1; 35 (6): 1828-1834.

    PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the midterm outcomes and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) rate in patients who had repair of the capsulotomy versus nonrepair following arthroscopic hip labral repair and correction of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).MethodsAll patients undergoing primary arthroscopic hip labral repair and correction of FAI between 2005 and 2012 were eligible for this study. Exclusion criteria were age < 18 years, lateral center-edge angle < 25°, previous hip procedures, femoral avascular necrosis, radiographic joint space ≤ 2 mm, or microfracture at arthroscopy. Patients who did not have the capsulotomy repaired were matched 1:2 with patients who had the capsulotomy repaired. Patients were matched by age, gender, and intraoperative procedures. The primary outcome score was the Hip Outcome Score Daily Living (HOS-ADL).ResultsForty-two patients (18 female patients, 24 male patients) without repair of the capsulotomy were matched with 84 patients with repaired capsulotomy. The average age for both groups was 38 ± 15 years. Patients in the nonrepair group were 6.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-52) times more likely to undergo THA compared with the repair group. There was no difference in revision rate between the 2 groups. The mean follow-up time was 7.3 ± 2.7 years and 6.4 ± 2.3 years for the nonrepair and repair group, respectively (P = .107). Patients in the repair group had significantly higher HOS-ADL (P = .01) and modified Harris hip score (mHHS; P = .007). The percentage of patients who reached minimum clinically important difference was significantly higher in the repair group for HOS-ADL (P = .002) and HOS-Sport (P = .036) compared with the nonrepair group. However, there was no difference in the percentage of patients who reached minimal important change for the mHHS (P = .060). Following hip arthroscopy, the average alpha angle was 41.6° ± 6° in the nonrepair group and 40.8° ± 3° in the repair group.ConclusionsPatients who undergo arthroscopic FAI correction and hip labral repair with repair of the capsulotomy had higher HOS-ADL and mHHS scores at midterm follow-up compared with patients with nonrepair, and the percentage of patients who reached the minimum clinically important difference was significantly higher in the repair group for HOS-ADL and HOS-Sport compared with the nonrepair group. In addition, a lower rate of conversion to THA was seen in the repair group.Level Of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…