Prevalence of borderline acetabular dysplasia in symptomatic and asymptomatic populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Patients with borderline acetabular dysplasia are a controversial patient population in hip preservation, as some have primarily impingement-based symptoms and others have instability-based symptoms. Borderline dysplasia is most commonly defined as a lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) of 20° to 25°. However, its prevalence has not been well established in the literature. Purpose: To (1) define the prevalence of borderline hip dysplasia in the general population as well as in populations presenting with hip pain using a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature and (2) describe differences between male and female patients as well as differences in prevalence from that of classic acetabular dysplasia. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed using search terms to capture borderline dysplasia, or studies reporting prevalence by LCEA. The search yielded 1932 results, of which 11 articles met inclusion criteria and were included in the final systematic review. Studies were grouped by patient cohort as (1) asymptomatic general population, (2) asymptomatic targeted population (eg, athletes in a specific sport), and (3) symptomatic hip pain population. The reporting of prevalence rates by subject or by hip was recorded. In a study, the rates of borderline dysplasia were compared with those of classic acetabular dysplasia (LCEA, \u3c20°). Results: The 11 studies included 19,648 hips (11,754 patients). In the asymptomatic general population, the pooled estimate of the prevalence of borderline dysplasia was 19.8% by subject and 23.3% by hip (range, 16.7%-46.0%). The targeted subpopulation group included 236 athletes with subgroups in ballet, football, hockey, volleyball, soccer, and track and field with prevalence ranging from 17.8% to 51.1%. The prevalence of borderline dysplasia in groups presenting with hip pain was 12.8% (range, 12.6%-16.0%). Borderline acetabular dysplasia was 3.5 times more common than classic acetabular dysplasia in the asymptomatic general population. Conclusion: This study demonstrated a prevalence of borderline dysplasia of 19.8% to 23.3% in the asymptomatic general population. Additionally, an estimated prevalence of 12.8% of hips in symptomatic patients highlights the common decision-making challenges in this population

Bibliometric and authorship trends over a 30 year publication history in two representative US sports medicine journals

Bibliometric studies are important to understand changes and improvement opportunities in academia. This study compared bibliometric trends for two major sports medicine/arthroscopy journals, the American Journal of Sports Medicine® (AJSM®) and Arthroscopy® over the past 30 years. Trends over time and comparisons between both journals were noted for common bibliometric variables (number of authors, references, pages, citations, and corresponding author position) as well as author gender and continental origin. Appropriate statistical analyses were performed. A p < 0.001 was considered statistically significant. One representative year per decade was used. There were 814 manuscripts from AJSM® and 650 from Arthroscopy®. For AJSM® the number of manuscripts steadily increased from 86 in 1986 to 350 in 2016; for Arthroscopy® the number of manuscripts increased from 73 in 1985/1986, to 267 in 2006, but then dropped to 229 in 2016. There were significant increases in all bibliometric variables, except for the number of citations which decreased in Arthroscopy®. There were significant differences in manuscript region of origin by journal (p = 0.000002). Arthroscopy® had a greater percentage of manuscripts from Asia than AJSM® (19.3% vs 11.5%) while AJSM® had a greater percentage from North America (70.3% vs 59.2%); both journals had similar percentages from Europe (18.2% for AJSM® and 21.6% for Arthroscopy®). For AJSM® the average percentage of female first authors was 13.3%, increasing from 4.7% in 1986 to 19.3% in 2016; the average percentage of female corresponding authors was 7.3%. For Arthroscopy®, the average percentage of female first authors was 8.1%, increasing from 2.8% in 1985/1986 to 15.7% in 2016 (p = 0.00007). In conclusion, AJSM® and Arthroscopy® showed an increase in most variables analyzed. Although Arthroscopy® is climbing at a higher rate than AJSM® for female authors, AJSM® has an overall greater percentage of female authors