BACKGROUND: The acetabular labrum provides a sealing function and a degree of hip joint stability. Limited, short-term follow-up studies suggest that labral refixation/preservation leads to superior outcomes compared with labral debridement/excision. PURPOSE: To compare the results of labral refixation versus focal labral excision/debridement in a cohort of patients who underwent arthroscopic correction of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We reported on patients who underwent labral debridement/focal labral excision during a period before the development of labral repair techniques. Patients with labral tears thought to be repairable with our current arthroscopic technique were compared with a cohort of patients who underwent labral refixation. To better match the 2 groups, only patients with labral pincer- or combined-type FAI were included. In the first 44 hips, the labrum was focally excised/debrided (group 1); in the next 50 hips, the labrum was refixed (group 2). Outcomes were measured with the modified Harris Hip Score (HHS), Short Form 12 (SF-12), and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain preoperatively and postoperatively. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were obtained to evaluate bony resection. RESULTS: The mean age was 32 years in group 1 and 28 years in group 2 with a mean follow-up of 42 months (range, 24-72 months). Preoperative mean subjective outcome scores were not significantly different between groups. At a mean 3.5 years' follow-up, subjective outcomes were significantly improved (P < .01) for both groups compared with preoperative scores. The HHS (P = .001), SF-12 (P = .041), and VAS pain scores (P = .004) were all significantly better for the refixation group compared with the debridement group at the most recent follow-up. At a mean 3.5 years' follow-up, good to excellent results were noted in 68% of the focal excision/debridement group and 92% of the refixation group (P = .004). CONCLUSION: Although other factors may have influenced these results, labral refixation compared with an earlier cohort of focal labral excision/debridement resulted in better HHS, SF-12, and VAS pain outcomes and a greater percentage of good to excellent results at a mean 3.5-year follow-up.
BACKGROUND: The acetabular labrum provides a sealing function and a degree of hip joint stability. Limited, short-term follow-up studies suggest that labral refixation/preservation leads to superior outcomes compared with labral debridement/excision. PURPOSE: To compare the results of labral refixation versus focal labral excision/debridement in a cohort of patients who underwent arthroscopic correction of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We reported on patients who underwent labral debridement/focal labral excision during a period before the development of labral repair techniques. Patients with labral tears thought to be repairable with our current arthroscopic technique were compared with a cohort of patients who underwent labral refixation. To better match the 2 groups, only patients with labral pincer- or combined-type FAI were included. In the first 44 hips, the labrum was focally excised/debrided (group 1); in the next 50 hips, the labrum was refixed (group 2). Outcomes were measured with the modified Harris Hip Score (HHS), Short Form 12 (SF-12), and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain preoperatively and postoperatively. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were obtained to evaluate bony resection. RESULTS: The mean age was 32 years in group 1 and 28 years in group 2 with a mean follow-up of 42 months (range, 24-72 months). Preoperative mean subjective outcome scores were not significantly different between groups. At a mean 3.5 years' follow-up, subjective outcomes were significantly improved (P < .01) for both groups compared with preoperative scores. The HHS (P = .001), SF-12 (P = .041), and VAS pain scores (P = .004) were all significantly better for the refixation group compared with the debridement group at the most recent follow-up. At a mean 3.5 years' follow-up, good to excellent results were noted in 68% of the focal excision/debridement group and 92% of the refixation group (P = .004). CONCLUSION: Although other factors may have influenced these results, labral refixation compared with an earlier cohort of focal labral excision/debridement resulted in better HHS, SF-12, and VAS pain outcomes and a greater percentage of good to excellent results at a mean 3.5-year follow-up.
Authors: Hermes H Miozzari; Marco Celia; John M Clark; Stefan Werlen; Florian D Naal; Hubert P Nötzli Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Simon D Steppacher; Helen Anwander; Corinne A Zurmühle; Moritz Tannast; Klaus A Siebenrock Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: C Signorelli; T Bonanzinga; N Lopomo; S Zaffagnini; M Marcacci; M Safran Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-11-14 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Ehsan Saadat; Scott D Martin; Thomas S Thornhill; Sarah A Brownlee; Elena Losina; Jeffrey N Katz Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2013-08-30 Impact factor: 6.202