Borderline Dysplastic Hips Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy Achieve Equivalent Patient Reported Outcomes When Compared With Hips With Normal Acetabular Coverage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Purpose:To systematically review and meta-analyze studies reporting lateral center edge angle as it relates to patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and clinically notable outcome assessments for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome or labral pathology with borderline dysplastic hips (BDH).Methods:PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science Core Collection databases were queried for articles evaluating lateral center edge angle as a predictor of PRO after hip arthroscopy. Articles were eligible for meta-analysis if they compared PROs measures between patients with normal acetabular coverage and borderline dysplasia and were at least level III evidence. Continuous random-effects models with standardized mean differences were used to compare postoperative Hip Outcome Score—Activities of Daily Living and sports subscales, modified Harris Hip Score, international Hip Outcome Tool scores, Satisfaction, and Visual Analog Scale Pain scores between normal coverage and borderline dysplastic groups.Results:Overall, 989 hips undergoing arthroscopy from six investigations were included in this meta-analysis, including 315 borderline dysplastic subjects (mean age 27.5 years) and 674 subjects with normal coverage (mean age 26.9 years). Borderline dysplastic and normal coverage cohorts were followed for an average of 37.0 and 36.8 months, respectively. Postoperative PRO measures (Hip Outcome Score—Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale, modified Harris Hip Score, international Hip Outcome Tool-12, Satisfaction, and Visual Analog Scale Pain) collected approximately three years after hip arthroscopy were not markedly different between subjects with BDH when compared with patients with normal coverage.Conclusions:In a meta-analysis of the available literature, patients with BDH are able to equally reach statistically similar clinical outcomes after isolated hip arthroscopy as compared with control subjects without dysplasia at short-term follow-up. A BDH should not be considered a contraindication to hip arthroscopy when optimal PRO achievement is the goal.Level of Evidence:Level III, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Outcome Scores and Survivorship of Patients Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy With Borderline Hip Dysplasia: A Propensity-Matched Study With Minimum 10-Year Follow-up

“…This durability of outcome improvement suggests that the improvement seen in previous short-term and midterm follow-up studies is sustained at long-term follow-up. 3,15,16 A recent meta-analysis by Krivicich et al, 14 evaluating 989 hips at 3-year follow-up, found minimal differences in PROs between patients with BHD and those without. One may reasonably point out that in the current study, many of the postoperative PRO scores for the BHD group were lower than those of controls without reaching statistical significance; however, it is important to note that the delta values from preoperative to postoperative scores were not statistically different aside from VAS pain.…”

“…At short-term follow-up, patients with BHD have demonstrated significant improvements in postoperative patientreported outcomes (PROs) and a high rate of achievement of clinically significant outcomes, without significant differences compared with patients without BHD. 14,15,21 At midterm follow-up, these outcomes are sustained with favorable PROs and high rates of clinically significant outcome achievement. 3,16 However, a paucity of literature is available regarding long-term outcomes for patients with FAIS in the setting of BHD, and the study that does exist is limited by the lack of comparative control groups.…”

The Russian version of the Hip Preservation Surgery Expectations Survey: translation and cross-cultural adaptation

“…Валидность -показатель того, насколько хорошо предлагаемый тест и его результат соответствуют поставленным задачам исследования. Доказано, что оригинальный опросник Hip Preservation Surgery Expectations Survey является валидным [20]. Прямой и обратный перевод, экспертная оценка различий и редактирование с учетом комментариев пациентов в рамках пилотного исследования позволили сохранить валидность оригинальной анкеты, что доказывают значения коэффициента внутриклассовой корреляции (0,82) и коэффициент α Кронбаха (0,945).…”

“…Многие авторы считают оправданной артроскопическую коррекцию ФАИ [13,14,15,16], так как при успешном исходе использование данной методики позволяет уменьшить симптомы, мешающие вести активный образ жизни, и отсрочить более травматичные и обширные вмешательства у молодых пациентов [1,2,3]. Однако удовлетворенность пациента результатом данного метода лечения колеблется от 68 до 100% [17,18,19,20]. Удовлетворенность пациента зависит от ряда факторов, таких как достигнутое функциональное состояние тазобедренного сустава после операции, наличие боли и способность выполнять повседневные задачи, которые вызывали трудности до операции [4,5,6,21].…”