TABLE A2.
Failure Rate of Included Studies: Hip Arthroscopic Surgerya
| First author (Year) | Follow-up,b mo | No. of Hips | Revision Hip Arthroscopic Surgery | Conversion to THA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | Description | n (%) | Description | |||
| Beck4 (2019) | 24 | 112 | 1 (0.9) | NR | 1 (0.9) | NR |
| Chaharbakhshi7 (2017) | 54.3 (24.2-83.8) | LT tear: 20; no LT tear: 20 | LT tear: 5 (25.0); no LT tear: 1 (5.0) | The mean time to revision was 22.9 mo (range, 4.1-48.1 mo). One case of revision consisted of loose body removal and recurrent LT debridement for partial tearing. There were 2 patients who each required 2 revisions: (1) One of these patients underwent revision arthroscopic surgery at 7.1 and 47.9 mo from the index arthroscopic procedure and ultimately underwent THA. (2) The remaining 2 revisions in the LT tear group were performed in 1 patient at 7.1 and 48.1 mo for recurrent chondral defects and labral tearing. One patient in the control group underwent revision at 1.8 mo from the index procedure for an underresected femoral neck deformity and recurrent labral tearing, which resulted in the alleviation of symptoms. | LT tear: 3 (15.0); no LT tear: 0 (0.0) |
Patient 1: age, 51.7 y; female;
BMI, 30.6; index arthroscopic findings of Seldes type I,
ALAD grade 1, acetabular Outerbridge grade 1, and
femoral head Outerbridge grade 0; primary procedure of
labral debridement; time to THA, 62.0 mo. Patient 2: age, 44.2 y; female; BMI, 29.1; index arthroscopic findings of Seldes type I, ALAD grade 2, acetabular Outerbridge grade 1 with a 2.5-cm2 defect, femoral head Outerbridge grade 0, and a cam lesion; primary procedure of labral repair, femoroplasty, and microfracture; time to THA, 16.6 mo. Patient 3: age, 48.2 y; female; BMI, 21.4; index arthroscopic findings of Seldes type II, ALAD grade 1, acetabular Outerbridge grade 1, femoral head Outerbridge grade 0, and a cam lesion; primary procedure of labral debridement and femoroplasty; time to THA, 48.5 mo. |
| Cvetanovich12 (2017) | 31.2 ± 7.2 | 36 | 1 (2.8) | NR | 0 (0.0) | NR |
| Domb14 (2018) | 68.8 ± 6.4 (60.0-93.8) | 21 | 4 (19.0) | The mean time to revision was 25.1 ± 19.2 mo (range, 4.1-50.1 mo). There were 2 hips that underwent loose body removal, 1 of which was for heterotopic ossification measuring >5 mm and the other was for residual suture material related to a rupture from previous capsular plication. All patients were noted to have improvements in PRO scores at a mean of 42.3 mo after revision. | 0 (0.0) | NR |
| Evans17 (2017) | 26.3 | 21 | 0 (0.0) | NR | 0 (0.0) | NR |
| Fukui18 (2015) | 40 (24-97) | 80 | 7 (8.8) |
Patient 1: Primary arthroscopic
procedure: pincer impingement, debridement of the LT,
and closure of capsulotomy; revision arthroscopic
procedure: adhesions and labral reconstruction. Patient 2: Primary arthroscopic procedure: cam impingement, pincer impingement, debridement of the LT, and closure of capsulotomy; revision arthroscopic procedure: adhesions and trochanteric bursitis. Patient 3: Primary arthroscopic procedure: cam impingement, pincer impingement, microfracture of the acetabulum, debridement of the LT, and closure of capsulotomy; revision arthroscopic procedure: adhesions and cam regrowth. Patient 4: Primary arthroscopic procedure: cam impingement, pincer impingement, debridement of the LT, and closure of capsulotomy; revision arthroscopic procedure: adhesions. Patient 5: Primary arthroscopic procedure: cam impingement, pincer impingement, debridement of the LT, and closure of capsulotomy; revision arthroscopic procedure: adhesions, iliotibial band and psoas release, trochanteric bursitis, and new acetabular chondral defect. Patient 6: Primary arthroscopic procedure: cam impingement, pincer impingement, microfracture of the acetabulum, debridement of the LT, and closure of capsulotomy; revision arthroscopic procedure: adhesions, unaddressed cam impingement, and new acetabular chondral defect. Patient 7: Primary arthroscopic procedure: cam impingement, pincer impingement, debridement of the LT, and closure of capsulotomy; revision arthroscopic procedure: adhesions and small labral injury. |
5 (6.3) | There were 4 men and 1 woman with a mean age of 42 y at a mean of 2 y (range, 11-48 mo) after arthroscopic surgery. |
| Hatakeyama22 (2018) | 42.5 (24.0-72.6) | 45 | 7 (15.6) | There were 2 patients who underwent revision arthroscopic surgery (trimming for osteophytes at the cotyloid fossa, labral repair, cam osteochondroplasty, and microfracture at the acetabulum) because of the progression of OA and labral retearing, and 5 underwent arthroscopic shelf acetabuloplasty. | 2 (4.4) | THA performed because of progressive OA with lateral migration of the femoral head. |
| Maldonado27 (2018) | Success: 39.2 ± 17.3; failure: 42.8 ± 20.4 | 122 | NR | NR | NR | NR |
| Nawabi34 (2016) | 31.3 ± 7.6 (23.1-67.3) | 46 | 2 (4.3) | At a mean of 9.6 and 23.8 mo after arthroscopic surgery, 1 patient underwent revision for painful adhesions, and 1 patient underwent it for recurrent labral tearing, respectively. | 0 (0.0) | NR |
| Yoon48 (2019) | 25.9 | 47 | NR | NR | NR | NR |
aALAD, acetabular labrum articular disruption; BMI, body mass index; LT, ligamentum teres; NR, not reported; OA, osteoarthritis; PRO, patient-reported outcome; THA, total hip arthroplasty.
bValues are presented as mean ± SD (and range, if shown).