Benjamin G Domb1, John M Redmond2, Kevin F Dunne2, Christine E Stake2, Asheesh Gupta2. 1. Hinsdale Orthopaedics, American Hip Institute in Chicago, Westmont, Illinois, U.S.A.. Electronic address: drdomb@americanhipinstitute.org. 2. Hinsdale Orthopaedics, American Hip Institute in Chicago, Westmont, Illinois, U.S.A.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study compared 2-year clinical outcomes in hip arthroscopy patients treated with microfracture to a matched control group without full-thickness chondral damage. METHODS: During the study period between June 2008 and July 2011, data were collected on all patients treated with hip arthroscopy who underwent microfracture. All patients were assessed pre- and postoperatively with 4 patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Pain was estimated on the visual analog scale (VAS), and satisfaction was measured on a scale from 0 to 10. A matched-pair group of patients who did not undergo microfracture was selected in a 1:2 ratio. Matching criteria were age within 5 years, sex, surgical procedures, and radiographic findings. RESULTS: Average follow-up for the study was 26.66 months (17.29 to 48.89 months). Forty-nine hips were included in the microfracture group and 98 hips were in entered in the nonmicrofracture group, with no significant difference in PRO scores preoperatively between the groups. Both groups had statistically significant postoperative improvement in all scores, and the average amount of change from preoperative to postoperative scores between the 2 groups was not statistically significantly different for any of the PRO scores. Most importantly, there was no statistically significant difference in postoperative PRO scores between the microfracture and control groups. Patient satisfaction was 6.9 for the microfracture group and 7.84 for the nonmicrofracture group, which was statistically significant (P < .05). When comparing patients who received acetabular microfracture to those who received femoral microfracture, both groups had similar preoperative and postoperative PRO scores, with no significant difference in the magnitude of change (delta) at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that patients undergoing microfracture during hip arthroscopy did not show a statistically significant difference in PRO scores when compared with a matched-pair control group at an average of 2 years of follow-up. Both groups showed significant improvement in all PRO scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, matched case-control study.
PURPOSE: This study compared 2-year clinical outcomes in hip arthroscopy patients treated with microfracture to a matched control group without full-thickness chondral damage. METHODS: During the study period between June 2008 and July 2011, data were collected on all patients treated with hip arthroscopy who underwent microfracture. All patients were assessed pre- and postoperatively with 4 patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Pain was estimated on the visual analog scale (VAS), and satisfaction was measured on a scale from 0 to 10. A matched-pair group of patients who did not undergo microfracture was selected in a 1:2 ratio. Matching criteria were age within 5 years, sex, surgical procedures, and radiographic findings. RESULTS: Average follow-up for the study was 26.66 months (17.29 to 48.89 months). Forty-nine hips were included in the microfracture group and 98 hips were in entered in the nonmicrofracture group, with no significant difference in PRO scores preoperatively between the groups. Both groups had statistically significant postoperative improvement in all scores, and the average amount of change from preoperative to postoperative scores between the 2 groups was not statistically significantly different for any of the PRO scores. Most importantly, there was no statistically significant difference in postoperative PRO scores between the microfracture and control groups. Patient satisfaction was 6.9 for the microfracture group and 7.84 for the nonmicrofracture group, which was statistically significant (P < .05). When comparing patients who received acetabular microfracture to those who received femoral microfracture, both groups had similar preoperative and postoperative PRO scores, with no significant difference in the magnitude of change (delta) at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that patients undergoing microfracture during hip arthroscopy did not show a statistically significant difference in PRO scores when compared with a matched-pair control group at an average of 2 years of follow-up. Both groups showed significant improvement in all PRO scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, matched case-control study.
Authors: Anthony Habib; Chloe E Haldane; Seper Ekhtiari; Darren de Sa; Nicole Simunovic; Etienne L Belzile; Olufemi R Ayeni Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2017-11-08 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Alison A Dallich; Ehud Rath; Ran Atzmon; Joshua R Radparvar; Andrea Fontana; Zachary Sharfman; Eyal Amar Journal: J Hip Preserv Surg Date: 2019-04-16
Authors: Luis Perez-Carro; Paola Rosi Mendoza Alejo; Gustavo Gutierrez Castanedo; Guillermo Menendez Solana; Jose Antonio Fernandez Divar; Pablo Galindo Rubin; Ana Alfonso Fernandez Journal: Arthrosc Tech Date: 2021-06-20