Arthroscopic Treatment of Acetabular Retroversion With Acetabuloplasty and Subspine Decompression: A Matched Comparison With Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Treatment for Focal Pincer-Type Femoroacetabular Impingement.

BackgroundGlobal acetabular retroversion is classically treated with open reverse periacetabular osteotomy. Given the low morbidity and recent success associated with the arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), there may also be a role for arthroscopic treatment of acetabular retroversion. However, the safety and outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery for retroversion need further study, and the effect of impingement from the anterior inferior iliac spine (subspine) in patients with retroversion is currently unknown.HypothesisArthroscopic treatment for global acetabular retroversion will be safe, and patients will have similar outcomes compared with a matched group undergoing arthroscopic treatment for focal pincer-type FAI.Study designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsPatients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for symptomatic global acetabular retroversion were prospectively enrolled and compared with a matched group of patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery for focal pincer-type FAI. Both groups underwent the same arthroscopic treatment protocol. All patients were administered patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, including the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively.ResultsThere were no differences in age, sex, or body mass index between 39 hips treated for global acetabular retroversion and 39 hips treated for focal pincer-type FAI. There were no major or minor complications in either group. Patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment for global acetabular retroversion demonstrated similar significant improvements in postoperative PRO scores (scores increased by 17 to 43 points) as patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment for focal pincer-type FAI. Patients treated for retroversion who also underwent subspine decompression had greater improvement than patients who did not undergo subspine decompression for the HOOS-Pain (33.7 ± 15.3 vs 22.5 ± 17.6, respectively; P = .046) and HOOS-Quality of Life (49.7 ± 18.8 vs 34.6 ± 22.0, respectively; P = .030) scores.ConclusionArthroscopic treatment for acetabular retroversion is safe and provides significant clinical improvement similar to arthroscopic treatment for pincer-type FAI. Patients with acetabular retroversion who also underwent arthroscopic subspine decompression demonstrated greater improvements in pain and quality of life outcomes than those who underwent arthroscopic treatment without subspine decompression

Outcomes of cartilage repair techniques for chondral injury in the hip-a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE/PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to assess the options of treatment and their related outcomes for chondral injuries in the hip based on the available evidence whilst highlighting new and innovative techniques. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature from PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, Google Scholar, British Nursing Index (BNI), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) was undertaken from their inception to March 2017 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Clinical outcome studies, prospective/retrospective case series and case reports that described the outcome of cartilage repair technique for the chondral injury in the hip were included. Studies on total hip replacement, animal studies, basic studies, trial protocols and review articles were excluded. RESULTS: The systematic review found 21 relevant papers with 596 hips. Over 80% of the included studies were published in or after 2010. Most studies were case series or case reports (18 studies, 85.7%). Arthroscopy was used in 11 studies (52.4%). The minimum follow-up period was six months. Mean age of the participants was 37.2 years; 93.5% of patients had cartilage injuries of the acetabulum and 6.5% of them had injuries of the femoral head. Amongst the 11 techniques described in the systematic review, autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis, osteochondral autograft transplantation and microfracture were the three frequently reported techniques. CONCLUSION: Over ten different techniques are available for cartilage repair in the hip, and most of them have good short- to medium-term outcomes. However, there are no robust comparative studies to assess superiority of one technique over another, and further research is required in this arena