Faculty Bibliography

Pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) describes a broad spectrum of clinical conditions that affect the viscera and musculature of the pelvic cavity. Though musculoskeletal pathologies have been implicated in various forms of PFD, orthopedic surgeons are not routinely consulted for the management of patients with pelvic symptomatology. Muscle dysfunction in PFD can be broadly classified into hypertonic or hypotonic conditions, each with their own associated symptoms. Pelvic musculoskeletal dysfunction may also present differently between males and female given gender differences in pelvic structure. In addition to the standard orthopedic history, physical examination maneuvers may be able to distinguish hip, spine, and sacroiliac joint dysfunction contributing to PFD. For certain etiologies of PFD, non-operative and/or operative orthopedic intervention may help to alleviate functional symptoms such as urinary incontinence and sexual dysfunction. The available research highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to treating PFD that includes orthopedic expertise, as well as the need for further research to assess the impact of orthopedic intervention on concomitant PFD symptoms, develop appropriate surgical indications, and achieve better outcomes for this patient population.
Copyright

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to determine and establish the MCID for the NAHS at 2 years in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). METHODS:Patients that underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS between 2010 and 2016 were analyzed for eligibility. Data were collected from a single surgeon's hip arthroscopy database. MCID was calculated for the NAHS utilizing a distribution-based method. RESULTS:. At baseline, the cohort's average NAHS score was 48.7 ± 13.6 and demonstrated an improvement of 36.5 ± 17.0 for NAHS at follow-up. This resulted in MCID values of + 8.5 for NAHS. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This is the first study to report the MCID (+ 8.5) for NAHS following primary hip arthroscopy, and as such, is a valuable contribution to future hip arthroscopy research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:IV.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Hip arthroscopy is a procedure commonly performed to correct various hip pathologies such as femoroacetabular impingement and labral tears. These hip pathologies commonly affect young, otherwise healthy patients. The recovery after hip arthroscopy can prevent patients from returning to work and impair performance levels, having significant economic repercussions. To date, there has been no cumulative analysis of the existing literature on return to work after hip arthroscopy. PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the existing literature regarding return to work after hip arthroscopy and analysis of factors associated with the ability to return to work and time to return to work. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:< .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Twelve studies with 1124 patients were included. Patients were followed for an average of 17.6 months. Using weighted means, the average rate of return to work was 71.35%, while full return to previous work duties was achieved at a rate of 50.89%. Modification to work duties was required at a rate of 15.48%. On average, the time to return to work was 115 days (range, 17-219 days). Rate of return by patients with workers' compensation status was found to be 85.15% at an average of 132 days (range, 37-211 days). Rate of return to work in workers performing professions reported as strenuous vs light (ie, mostly sedentary) jobs showed a statistically higher return to work in light professions (risk ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41-0.69). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:After hip arthroscopy, there is a high rate of return to work at an average of 115 days after surgery. However, full return to work was achieved by only half of patients upon final follow-up.

Although hip arthroscopy has been around for decades, recent developments in the understanding of hip pathology and surgical technique have led to the evolution of how labral pathology is addressed. Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is the primary condition that hip arthroscopy can treat and is described as the mechanical conflict between the femoral neck and acetabulum due to bony morphology. As a result, the labrum endures increased stress and is subject to disruption of its biomechanical properties, which leads to tearing, destabilization of the chondral-labral junction, and loss of the suction seal effect of the hip joint. This review provides an overview of current practices in the diagnosis and treatment of labral pathology. The 4 "R"s of labrum management are described: resect, repair, reconstruct, and replace.

Acetabular rim fractures can accompany patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Frequently, the acetabular rim fracture is excised. However, if the osseous fragment of the acetabular rim fracture is large enough to result in instability, then the acetabular rim fracture should be reduced and secured with internal fixation. The purpose of this technical note was to describe the arthroscopic technique of internal fixation of an acetabular rim fracture.

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has emerged as a common cause of hip pain, especially in young patients. While the exact cause of FAI is unknown, it is thought to result from repetitive microtrauma to the proximal femoral epiphysis leading to abnormal biomechanics. Patients typically present with groin pain that is exacerbated by hip flexion and internal rotation. Diagnosis of FAI is made through careful consideration of patient presentation as well as physical exam and diagnostic imaging. Use of radiographs can help diagnose both cam and pincer lesions, while the use of MRI can diagnose labral tears and cartilage damage associated with FAI. Both non-operative and surgical options have their role in the treatment of FAI and its associated labral tears; however, hip arthroscopy has had successful outcomes when compared with physical therapy alone. Unfortunately, chondral lesions associated with FAI have had poorer outcomes with a higher conversion rate to arthroplasty. Capsular closure following hip arthroscopy has shown superior clinical outcomes and therefore should be performed if possible. More recently, primary labral reconstruction has emerged in the literature as a good option for irreparable labral tears. While non-operative management may have its role in treating patients with FAI, hip arthroscopy has developed a successful track record in being able to treat cam and pincer lesions, chondral damage, and labral injuries.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the association between postoperative cam lesion measured by the "femoroacetabular impingement resection (FAIR) arc" and 2-year patient outcomes following hip arthroscopy. METHODS:A retrospective review of prospectively gathered data from 2013-2017 was performed. All patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAI with ≥ 2-year follow-up were included. Cam FAIR arc measurements were made pre and postoperatively on a 45° Dunn view radiograph. The clinical effect of postoperative cam maximal radial distance (MRD) was assessed using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS). Patients were divided into subgroups based on relationship to the mean and standard deviations for cam MRD. One half standard deviation above the mean was found to be 3.15 mm. RESULTS:=0.004). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients in the cam MRD < 3.15 mm group had significantly higher mHHS (89.7 vs 70.0 p<0.001) and NAHS scores (90.5 vs 72.9, p<0.001) than those in the >3.15 mm group. Additionally, more patients in the <3.15 mm group reached the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (95.2% vs 78.9%, p=0.048) and were above patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) (95.2% vs 52.6%, p<0.001) compared to the >3.15 mm group. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients with a lower postoperative cam MRD relative to the FAIR arc demonstrated significantly improved outcomes as compared to those with higher postoperative MRD at two-year follow-up.

Purpose/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study was to systematically review the evidence in the literature to ascertain whether acetabular labral repair (ALR) or debridement (ALD) resulted in superior patient outcomes. Methods/UNASSIGNED:value <.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results/UNASSIGNED:There were 8 studies included (level of evidence [LOE] I = 1; LOE II = 2; LOE III = 5). The 7 studies compared 364 patients (369 hips) with ALR to 318 patients (329 hips) with ALD, with a mean follow-up time ranging between 32-120 months. Five studies found significantly improved patient reported outcomes with ALR (Harris Hip Score, Merle d'Aubigné, Pain, SF-12). Several studies compared the outcomes after ALR and ALD and found statistical significance in all investigated metrics in favor of ALR. One study found a significant improvement in abduction but no other study found any difference in range of motion. No study found any difference in complication rate, revision rate or conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Although, 2 studies found ALR reduced the rate of osteoarthritic progression. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Current literature suggests that acetabular labral repair may result in superior patient reported outcomes. However, there appears to be no significant difference in the rate of progression to total hip arthroplasty at up to 10-year follow-up. Level of Evidence/UNASSIGNED:Level III, systematic review of Level I, II, and III studies.