Hip Arthroscopy in Patients Aged 40 Years and Older: Greater Success With Labral Reconstruction Compared With Labral Repair
Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery, ISSN: 0749-8063, Vol: 36, Issue: 8, Page: 2137-2144
2020
- 36Citations
- 38Captures
- 2Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations36
- Citation Indexes36
- 36
- CrossRef6
- Captures38
- Readers38
- 38
- Mentions2
- News Mentions2
- News2
Most Recent News
Should refixation or acute reconstruction be used to treat a hypoplastic labral tear?
Click here to read the Cover Story, "Surgeons weigh surgical options for primary hip labral tears." The role for acute labral reconstruction continues to be defined. Benjamin G. Domb, MD, and colleagues published a study that supports its use in the setting of irreparable tears and segmental defects or in the setting of deficiency secondary to an ossified labrum. That being said, I favor labral re
Article Description
To assess the outcomes of complete, primary, arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction among patients aged 40 years and older compared with those who underwent primary labral repair and compared with patients aged 30 to 39 years who underwent complete, primary labral reconstruction. We recruited all patients who underwent arthroscopic labral reconstruction between March 2010 and June 2015 and were aged 30 to 65 years or who underwent arthroscopic labral repair between June 2009 and June 2015 and were aged 40 to 65 years. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Lower Extremity Function Score, and visual analog scale score for average pain were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up. Failure was defined as the need for revision ipsilateral hip surgery. The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (a subset of failure) was assessed separately. A total of 363 hips in 343 patients met the inclusion criteria. Follow-up was available for 312 hips (86.0%), and the average time to follow-up was 4.2 years (range, 2.0-8.5 years). After adjustment for differences in follow-up time between groups, failure was 3.29 times more likely for hips in the repair group aged 40 years and older than for hips in the reconstruction group aged 40 years and older (relative rate, 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-8.69; P =.02), and there was no difference in the failure rate for hips in the reconstruction group aged 40 years and older compared with hips in the reconstruction group aged 30 to 39 years (relative rate, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-1.89; P =.37). The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty was not meaningfully different between the 3 groups. Among hips for which treatment did not fail, average improvement in the mHHS measured 35 points and both labral reconstruction groups saw a greater mHHS improvement than the labral repair group of patients aged 40 years and older ( P =.01 and P <.01). Labral reconstruction led to a lower failure rate, greater average improvement in the mHHS, and equivalent postoperative patient-reported outcome scores compared with labral repair among patients aged 40 years and older in this study population, and the outcomes of labral reconstruction were similar between patients aged 40 years and older and those aged 30 to 39 years. Complete labral reconstruction may be particularly advantageous in patients aged 40 years and older. Level III, retrospective comparative study.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749806320303480; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2020.04.031; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85086727137&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32360267; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749806320303480; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2020.04.031
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know