Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is being increasingly evaluated for use in orthopaedic surgery. The performance of the PROMIS in patients undergoing hip preservation surgery is unknown. Purpose: To investigate the psychometric performance of the PROMIS compared with legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients indicated for hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Data from consecutive patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery between January and October 2018 for the treatment of FAIS were collected and analyzed. Baseline data, including preoperative PROM scores and demographics, were recorded. PROMs included the PROMIS Physical Function (PF), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the International Hip Outcome Tool–12 (iHOT-12), and the Veterans RAND 12-item health survey (VR-12). Pearson and Spearman coefficient analyses were used to identify correlations between continuous and noncontinuous variables, respectively. Correlation was defined as excellent (>0.80), very good (0.71-0.80), good (0.61-0.70), fair (0.41-0.60), or poor (0.21-0.40). A multivariate linear regression analysis was used to identify preoperative predictors of having higher preoperative PROMIS scores. Results: A total of 197 patients with a mean age and body mass index (BMI) of 32.8 ± 12.6 years and 25.7 ± 5.6 kg/m2, respectively, were included in the final analysis. There were no ceiling or floor effects for the PROMIS PF score observed in the study group. With regard to hip-specific measures, PROMIS PF scores demonstrated excellent correlation with HOS–Activities of Daily Living ( r = 0.801; P < .001) scores, very good correlation with mHHS ( r = 0.721; P < .001) and iHOT-12 ( r = 0.722; P < .001) scores, and good correlation with HOS–Sports Specific ( r = 0.675; P < .001) scores. With regard to general health–related quality of life (HRQoL) measures, PROMIS PF scores demonstrated very good correlation with VR-12 mental ( r = 0.721; P < .001) scores, good correlation with VR-12 physical ( r = 0.618; P < .001) scores, and poor correlation with visual analog scale for pain ( r = –0.365; P < .001) scores. Patients who reported being physically active were more likely to have a higher preoperative PROMIS score (β = 3.216; P = .004). Lower PROMIS scores were found in patients with a higher BMI (β = –0.236; P = .005) and in female patients (β = –2.608; P = .014). Conclusion: In patients with FAIS, the preoperative PROMIS PF scores demonstrated excellent to good correlation with legacy hip-specific instruments as well as with HRQoL measures. No ceiling or floor effects were identified. Notably, of the hip-specific PROMs administered, the PROMIS PF demonstrated the weakest correlation with the HOS–Sports Specific subscale. Physical activity, BMI, and sex were predictors of preoperative PROMIS scores in our patient population.

Background: Previous studies have evaluated the effect of distance to high-volume centers on outcomes after joint replacement. However, there is limited evidence on whether this distance has an effect on outcomes after undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Purpose: To determine whether increased distance from a patient’s home to his or her primary orthopaedic clinic has an influence on the ability to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on outcome measures after surgery for FAIS. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on patients undergoing surgery for FAIS by a single surgeon from January 2012 through January 2017. A total of 692 patients were identified and split into 2 groups: driving distance of <50 miles from our institution (referral group) and driving distance of <50 miles from our institution (local group). Preoperative and 2-year postoperative scores on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living and Sport-Specific subscales, International Hip Outcome Tool–12, and modified Harris Hip Score, were assessed. Patients achieving the MCID on any included PROM were analyzed using a chi-square analysis. Logistic regression was performed to determine whether driving distance and other demographic variables of interest had an effect on achieving the MCID. Study data were analyzed using PatientIQ, a cloud-based research and analytics platform for health care. Results: There were 647 patients who completed 2-year follow-up and were included in the analysis. Of these patients, 116 (17.9%) were identified as being ≥50 miles from their orthopaedic provider, and 531 (82.1%) were identified as having a driving distance of <50 miles. A total of 100 patients (86.2%) in the referral group reached the MCID, and 476 patients (89.6%) in the local group reached the MCID. There was no statistically significant difference in reaching the MCID on any of the included PROMs between the 2 groups ( P = .364). The same result held when controlling for a number of factors including age, body mass index, and adjusted gross income with logistic regression. Conclusion: When controlling for a number of factors including age, body mass index, and adjusted gross income, distance to a high-volume hip arthroscopic surgery center did not have an effect on postoperative outcome scores or achieving the MCID 2 years after undergoing surgery for FAIS.

Background: Previous literature has examined the association between lumbosacral pathology and hip pathomechanics. However, the effect of lumbosacral pathologies and previous lumbosacral surgery on achieving meaningful outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) has yet to be studied conclusively. Purpose: To determine whether a history of lumbosacral spine pathology has an influence on achieving minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS by a single, fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeon between January 2012 and April 2017 with minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with a history of lumbosacral spine pathology (eg, lumbosacral fusion, disc or vertebral pathology, or history of lumbosacral fractures) were matched 1:2 by age, body mass index, and sex to patients without spine pathology. Clinical outcomes including the Hip Outcome Score–activities of daily living subscale (HOS-ADL), HOS–sports subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), international Hip Outcome Tool–12 (iHOT-12), visual analog scale (VAS) pain, and VAS satisfaction were compared between the groups using an independent t test. The threshold of every outcome score for achieving MCID was calculated separately for each group and frequencies were compared. Results: A total of 83 of 108 eligible patients with lumbosacral pathology were identified and matched to 166 patients without any spine pathology. When compared with the non–spine pathology group, the lumbosacral pathology group had significantly lower 2-year postoperative outcome score averages across all reported outcome tools (all P < .001). There were significant differences in the proportion achieving the threshold for HOS-ADL (60.6% vs 80.0%; P = .004), HOS-SS (57.6% vs 82.1%; P < .001), mHHS (66.7% vs 81.7%; P = .025), and iHOT-12 (54.8% vs 87.6%; P < .001) scores for MCID when comparing the lumbosacral and nonlumbosacral pathology groups. Conclusion: Patients with a history of lumbosacral pathology achieved significantly lower short-term meaningful clinical outcomes after undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS when compared with patients without spine pathology. The present study findings have implications for preoperative patient screening, shared decision-making processes/expectation management, and rehabilitation strategies.

Background and Objectives: While historically aggressive, some synovial sarcomas (SS) are clinically indolent. This study sought to determine whether SS grade predicts oncologic outcomes and whether Grade 1 disease might exist.Methods: Thirty-five cases from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed.Clinicopathological data were analyzed and Kaplan-Meier assessed survival. Results:The median patient age was 37 years (interquartile range: 28-51.5). The local control rate was 74.3%, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) was worse in positive versus negative margin resections (p = 0.023). The incidence of metastasis was 21.9% (n = 7) at a median 31 ± 31.7 months, and metastasis-free survival was 50.0% in Grade 3 SS versus 86.5% in Grade 2 (p = 0.026). Among a theoretical Grade 1 group, the overall survival (OS) and RFS profiles were improved compared to Grade 2 and 3 SS, respectively (p = 0.014 and p = 0.030). The Grade 1 group had a 15.8% (n = 3) metastatic rate and 80% 10-year survival.Conclusions: Tumor grade appears to predict outcomes in SS. A theoretical Grade 1 group showed improved OS and RFS versus Grades 2 and 3 SS, with metastatic rates and long-term survival resembling the historical literature for other low-grade soft tissue sarcomas. Our group continues to support the French Federation of Cancer Centers diagnostic strategy and NCCN treatment guidelines for SS.

Management of periacetabular lesions involves complex clinical decision making. The modified Harrington procedure with total hip arthroplasty can recreate pelvic stability with a cement rebar construct as well as a functional hip. This study analyzes the modified Harrington procedure to assess construct longevity and patient outcomes. We queried a prospectively maintained database to identify all patients at a large academic medical center from 2017 to 2019 with periacetabular metastatic disease treated with a modified Harrington. Medical records were reviewed and complications, patient outcomes, Musculoskeletal Society Tumor (MSTS) scores, and implant survival were recorded. A total of nine patients were treated with the modified Harrington between 2017 and 2019. At maximum follow- up there were zero revisions or longterm complications. The mean preoperative MSTS score was 2.2 (range, 0-18), compared to the mean postoperative MSTS score of 17.7 (range, 9-25) recorded at a mean 4 (range, 1-30) months following surgery (p<0.001). The modified Harrington technique total hip technique for reconstruction in periacetabular metastatic bone disease is a safe procedure with effective symptom relief, improvement in function, and excellent implant survivorship.

Background: Data on outcomes in patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) who undergo hip arthroscopy remain limited, particularly in regard to return to sport (RTS). Purpose: To evaluate outcomes in patients with BHD and their ability to RTS after hip arthroscopy for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Consecutive patients with self-reported athletic activity and radiographic evidence of BHD, characterized by a lateral femoral center-edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and 25° and a Tönnis angle >10°, who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS between November 2014 and March 2017 were identified. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes including the Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score–Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction were analyzed at minimum 2-year follow-up. In addition, all patients completed an RTS survey. Results: A total of 41 patients with a mean age and body mass index (BMI) of 29.6 ± 13.4 years and 25.3 ± 5.6, respectively, were included. Mean LCEA and Tönnis angle for the study population were 22.7°± 1.8° and 13.3°± 2.9°, respectively. A total of 31 (75.6%) patients were able to RTS after hip arthroscopy at a mean of 8.3 ± 3.2 months. A total of 14 patients (45.2%) were able to RTS at the same level of activity, 16 patients (51.6%) returned to a lower level of activity, and only 1 (3.2%) patient returned to a higher level of activity. Of the 11 high school and collegiate athletes, 10 (90.9%) were able to RTS. All patients demonstrated significant improvements in all patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as well as in pain scores at a mean of 26.1 ± 5.4 months after surgery. Patients who were able to RTS had a lower preoperative BMI than patients who did not RTS. Analysis of minimum 2-year PROMs demonstrated better HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, mHHS, iHOT-12, and VAS outcomes for pain in patients able to RTS versus those who did not RTS ( P < .05). Conclusion: Of the patients with BHD studied here, 75.6% of patients successfully returned to sport at a mean of 8.3 ± 3.2 months after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. Of the patients who successfully returned to sport, 45.2% returned at the same level, and 3.2% returned at a higher activity level.

Background: There is a paucity of information available to clinicians on outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic surgery for labral repairs and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome with simultaneous repair of the gluteus medius and/or minimus muscles. Purpose: To determine whether patients with labral tears and concomitant gluteal pathology who undergo simultaneous endoscopic labral and gluteus medius and/or minimus repair experience similar outcomes to patients with isolated labral tears who undergo endoscopic labral repair alone. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A matched retrospective comparative cohort study was performed. Patients who underwent gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant labral repair between January 2012 and November 2019 were identified. These patients were matched in a 1:3 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index (BMI) to patients who underwent labral repair alone. Preoperative radiographs were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. PRO measures included the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living and Sports subscales, modified Harris Hip Score, 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool, and visual analog scales for pain and satisfaction. Published labral repair minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds were utilized for these measures. Results: A total of 31 patients who underwent gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant labral repair (27 female, 4 male; age, 50.8 ± 7.3 years; BMI, 27.9 ± 5.2) were matched with 93 patients who underwent labral repair alone (81 female, 12 male; age, 50.9 ± 8.1 years; BMI, 28.5 ± 6.2). There were no significant differences in sex ( P > .99), age ( P = .869), or BMI ( P = .592); preoperative radiographic measurements; or preoperative or 2-year postoperative PRO scores ( P≥ .081). Changes between preoperative and 2-year postoperative PRO scores were significantly different for both groups for all PROs assessed ( P < .001 for all). There were no significant differences in MCID or PASS achievement rates ( P≥ .123), with low PASS achievement rates of 40% to 60% found in both groups. Conclusion: Patients who were treated with endoscopic gluteus medius and/or minimus repair with concomitant labral repair demonstrated comparable outcomes with those who were treated with endoscopic labral repair alone.

No abstract