The arthroscopic treatment of FAI and labral tears in patients with Tönnis grade 1 had good results at 5-year follow-up. After controlling for other variables using a matched-pair comparison, patients with Tönnis grade 1 had similar, durable improvements to those with Tönnis grade 0. While strict surgical indications and appropriate expectations are recommended for patients with mild OA, Tönnis grade 1 alone should not be considered a contraindication to hip arthroscopic surgery.

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Revision hip arthroscopy is increasingly common and often addresses acetabular labrum pathology. There is a lack of consensus on indications or outcomes of revision labral repair versus reconstruction. Purpose: To report clinical outcomes of labral reconstruction during revision hip arthroscopy at minimum 2-year follow-up as compared with pair-matched labral repair during revision hip arthroscopy (control group) and to suggest a decision-making algorithm for labral treatment in revision hip arthroscopy. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy with labral reconstruction were matched 1:2 with patients who underwent revision arthroscopic labral repair. Patients were matched according to age, sex, and body mass index. Outcome scores, including the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale, and a visual analog scale for pain, were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up. At latest follow-up, patient satisfaction on a 0-10 scale and the abbreviated International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) were collected. Complications, subsequent arthroscopies, and conversion to total hip arthroplasty were collected as well. Results: A total of 15 revision labral reconstructions were pair matched to 30 revision labral repairs. The reconstructions had fewer isolated Seldes type I detachments ( P = .008) and lower postoperative lateral center-edge angle, but there were otherwise no significant differences in demographics, radiographics, intraoperative findings, or procedures. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in all outcomes and visual analog scale at minimum 2-year follow-up. The revision repairs trended toward better preoperative scores: mHHS (mean ± SD: 59.3 ± 16.5 vs 54.2 ± 16.0), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (61.0 ± 16.7 vs 51.2 ± 17.6), Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale (39.6 ± 25.1 vs 30.5 ± 22.1), and visual analog scale (5.8 ± 1.8 vs 6.2 ± 2.2). At follow-up, the revision repair group had significantly higher mHHS (84.1 ± 14.8 vs 72.0 ± 18.3, P = .043) and iHOT-12 (72.2 ± 23.3 vs 49.0 ± 27.6, P = .023) scores than the reconstruction group. The magnitudes of pre- to postoperative improvement between the groups were comparable. The groups also had comparable rates of complications: 1 case of numbness in each group ( P > .999), subsequent arthroscopies (repair: n = 2, 6.5%; revision: n = 3, 20%; P = .150), and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (1 patient in each group, P > .999). Conclusion: Labral reconstruction safely and effectively treats irreparable labra in revision hip arthroscopy. However, labral repair is another treatment option for reparable labra, yielding similar magnitude of improvement. A proposed algorithm may assist in surgical decision making to achieve optimal outcomes based on the condition and history of each patient’s acetabular labrum.

No abstract

In the mid-term, microfracture as a part of hip arthroscopy demonstrated favourable outcomes and 72% survivorship. Careful patient selection is warranted to limit the risk of conversion to THA.

No abstract

Background: Superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) has been gaining popularity as a treatment for irreparable rotator cuff tears (RCTs), especially in younger patients. This biomechanical study aimed to investigate how SCR affects functional abduction force, humeral head migration, and passive range of motion following an irreparable RCT. We hypothesized that SCR will restore these parameters to nearly intact shoulder levels. Methods: Six fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were evaluated using a custom biomechanical testing apparatus. Each shoulder was taken through 3 conditions: (1) intact (control); (2) irreparable, complete supraspinatus (SS) tear; and (3) SCR. Functional abduction force, superior humeral head migration, and passive range of motion, including axial shoulder rotation, were measured in static condition at 0 , 30 , and 60 of glenohumeral abduction. Data were analyzed using the paired Student t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test, depending on the results of normality testing. Results: The irreparable SS tear resulted in significantly lower functional abduction force at 30 of abduction (P ¼ .01) and a trend toward a decrease (P ¼ .17) at 60 compared with the intact configuration. SCR shoulders produced greater functional force at 0 compared with the tear configuration (P ¼ .046). Humeral head migration was significantly increased by 4.4 and 3.0 mm at 0 and 30 of abduction, respectively, when comparing the intact vs. SS tear configurations (P ¼ .001). SCR decreased superior migration down to levels of intact shoulders at 0 and 30 of abduction (P ¼ .008 and P ¼ .013, respectively) and was not significantly different from the intact configuration at any angle. SCR decreased passive shoulder extension compared with the tear configuration and increased abduction compared with the intact configuration (P ¼ .007 and P ¼ .03, respectively). The overall arc of axial rotation was not significantly different between SCR and the intact configuration at any angle. Conclusions: In the setting of an irreparable SS tear, SCR restores key biomechanical parameters of the shoulder to intact levels. SCR should be considered for qualifying patients with irreparable RCTs.

Chondral injuries of the hip joint are often symptomatic and affect patient activity level. Several procedures are available for addressing chondral injuries, including microfracture. Microfracture is a marrow-stimulating procedure, which creates subchondral perforation in the bone, allowing pluripotent mesenchymal stem cells to migrate from the marrow into the chondral defect and form fibrocartilaginous tissue. In the knee, microfracture has been shown to relieve pain symptoms. In the hip, microfracture has been studied to a lesser extent, but published studies have shown promising clinical outcomes. The depth, joint congruity, and geometry of the hip joint make microfracture technically challenging. The most common technique uses hip-specific microfracture awls, but the trajectory of impaction is not perpendicular to the subchondral plate. Consequently, the parallel direction of impaction creates poorly defined channels. We describe an arthroscopic microfracture technique for the hip using a flexible microfracture drill. The drill and angled guides simplify access to the chondral defect. The microfracture drill creates clear osseous channels, avoiding compaction of the surrounding bone and obstruction of the channels. Furthermore, this technique allows for better control of the angle and depth of the drill holes, which enhances reproducibility and may yield improved clinical outcomes.