Literature DB >> 27744594

Labral Reattachment in Femoroacetabular Impingement Surgery Results in Increased 10-year Survivorship Compared With Resection.

Helen Anwander1, Klaus A Siebenrock1, Moritz Tannast1, Simon D Steppacher2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Since the importance of an intact labrum for normal hip function has been shown, labral reattachment has become the standard method for open or arthroscopic treatment of hips with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). However, no long-term clinical results exist evaluating the effect of labral reattachment. A 2-year followup comparing open surgical treatment of FAI with labral resection versus reattachment was previously performed at our clinic. The goal of this study was to report a concise followup of these patients at a minimum of 10 years. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked if patients undergoing surgical hip dislocation for the treatment of mixed-type FAI with labral reattachment compared with labral resection had (1) improved hip pain and function based on the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score; and (2) improved survival at 10-year followup.
METHODS: Between June 1999 and July 2002, we performed surgical hip dislocation with femoral neck osteoplasty and acetabular rim trimming in 52 patients (60 hips) with mixed-type FAI. In the first 20 patients (25 hips) until June 2001, a torn labrum or a detached labrum in the area of acetabular rim resection was resected. In the next 32 patients (35 hips), reattachment of the labrum was performed. The same indications were used to perform both procedures during the periods in question. Of the 20 patients (25 hips) in the first group, 19 patients (95%) (24 hips [96%]) were available for clinical and/or radiographic followup at a minimum of 10 years (mean, 13 years; range, 12-14 years). Of the 32 patients (35 hips) in the second group, 29 patients (91%) (32 hips [91%]) were available for clinical and/or radiographic followup at a minimum of 10 years (mean, 12 years; range, 10-13 years). We used the anterior impingement test to assess pain. Function was assessed using the Merle d'Aubigné- Postel score and ROM. Survivorship calculation was performed using the method of Kaplan-Meier with failure defined as conversion to THA, progression of osteoarthritis (of one grade or more on the Tönnis score), and a Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score < 15.
RESULTS: At the 10-year followup, hip pain in hips with labral reattachment was slightly improved for the postoperative Merle d'Aubigné-Postel pain subscore (5.0 ± 1.0 [3-6] versus 3.9 ± 1.7 [0-6]; p = 0.017). No difference existed for the prevalence of hip pain assessed using the anterior impingement test with the numbers available (resection group 52% [11 of 21 hips] versus reattachment group 27% [eight of 30 hips]; odds ratio, 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-9.83; p = 0.062). Function was slightly better in the reattachment group for the overall Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score (16.7 ± 1.5 [13-18] versus 15.3 ± 2.4 [9-18]; p = 0.028) and hip abduction (45° ± 13° [range, 30°-70°] versus 38° ± 8° [range, 25°-45°]; p = 0.001). Hips with labral reattachment showed a better survival rate at 10 years than did hips that underwent labral resection (78%; 95% CI, 64%-92% versus 46%, 95% CI, 26%-66%; p = 0.009) with the endpoints defined as conversion to THA, progression of osteoarthritis, and a Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score < 15. With isolated endpoints, survival at 10 years was increased for labral reattachment and the endpoint Merle d'Aubigné score < 15 (83%, 95% CI, 70%-97% versus 48%, 95% CI, 28%-69%; p = 0.009) but did not differ for progression of osteoarthritis (83%, 95% CI, 68%-97% versus 81%, 95% CI, 63%-98%; p = 0.957) or conversion to THA (94%, 95% CI, 86%-100% versus 87%, 95% CI, 74%-100%; p = 0.366).
CONCLUSIONS: The current results suggest the importance of preserving the labrum and show that resection may put the hip at risk for early deterioration. At 10-year followup, hips with labral reattachment less frequently had a decreased Merle d'Aubigné score but no effect on progression of osteoarthritis or conversion to THA could be shown. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27744594      PMCID: PMC5339132          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-5114-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  37 in total

1.  Arthroscopic debridement versus refixation of the acetabular labrum associated with femoroacetabular impingement: mean 3.5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Christopher M Larson; M Russell Giveans; Rebecca M Stone
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2012-02-03       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  The influence of the acetabular labrum on hip joint cartilage consolidation: a poroelastic finite element model.

Authors:  S J Ferguson; J T Bryant; R Ganz; K Ito
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.712

3.  What are the radiographic reference values for acetabular under- and overcoverage?

Authors:  Moritz Tannast; Markus S Hanke; Guoyan Zheng; Simon D Steppacher; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Surgical hip dislocation for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: factors predicting 5-year survivorship.

Authors:  Simon D Steppacher; Carmen Huemmer; Joseph M Schwab; Moritz Tannast; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-09-08       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  The hip fluid seal--Part I: the effect of an acetabular labral tear, repair, resection, and reconstruction on hip fluid pressurization.

Authors:  Marc J Philippon; Jeffrey J Nepple; Kevin J Campbell; Grant J Dornan; Kyle S Jansson; Robert F LaPrade; Coen A Wijdicks
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Surgical hip dislocation for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement in high-level athletes.

Authors:  Florian D Naal; Hermes H Miozzari; Tobias F Wyss; Hubert P Nötzli
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-12-20       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  Midterm results of surgical hip dislocation for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Florian D Naal; Hermes H Miozzari; Michael Schär; Tobias Hesper; Hubert P Nötzli
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2012-05-03       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  Surgery for femoroacetabular impingement using a minimally invasive anterolateral approach: analysis of 118 cases at 2.2-year follow-up.

Authors:  P Chiron; A Espié; N Reina; E Cavaignac; F Molinier; J-M Laffosse
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2012-01-16       Impact factor: 2.256

9.  The prognosis in untreated dysplasia of the hip. A study of radiographic factors that predict the outcome.

Authors:  S B Murphy; R Ganz; M E Müller
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Arthroscopic labral repair versus labral debridement in patients with femoroacetabular impingement: a minimum 2.5 year follow-up study.

Authors:  Sarper Cetinkaya; Berkin Toker; Vahit E Ozden; Goksel Dikmen; Omer Taser
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 2.135

View more
  12 in total

1.  Arthroscopic versus open treatment of cam-type femoro-acetabular impingement: retrospective cohort clinical study.

Authors:  Paulo A Rego; Vasco Mascarenhas; Filipe S Oliveira; Pedro C Pinto; Eduardo Sampaio; Jacinto Monteiro
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  What Is the Association Between Articular Cartilage Damage and Subsequent THA 20 Years After Hip Arthroscopy for Labral Tears?

Authors:  Maureen K Dwyer; Catharine Tumpowsky; Andrew Boone; JoAnn Lee; Joseph C McCarthy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Improved Cartilage Quality on Delayed Gadolinium-Enhanced MRI of Hip Cartilage after Subchondral Drilling of Acetabular Cartilage Flaps in Femoroacetabular Impingement Surgery at Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Florian Schmaranzer; Pascal C Haefeli; Emanuel F Liechti; Markus S Hanke; Moritz Tannast; Lorenz Büchler
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2020-07-19       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Good Outcome Scores and Low Conversion Rate to THA 10 Years After Hip Arthroscopy for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement.

Authors:  Lorenz Büchler; Valentin Grob; Helen Anwander; Till D Lerch; Pascal C Haefeli
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  What the papers say.

Authors:  Ajay Malviya
Journal:  J Hip Preserv Surg       Date:  2017-12-06

Review 6.  Imaging evaluation of the hip after arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Julia Crim
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Allocation of Anchors During Labral Repair: A Multicenter Cohort Analysis of Labral Treatment in Hip Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Ryan P McGovern; John J Christoforetti; Benjamin R Kivlan; Shane J Nho; Andrew B Wolff; John P Salvo; Dean Matsuda; Thomas J Ellis; Allston J Stubbs; Dominic S Carreira
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-02-18

Review 8.  Repair versus Debridement for Acetabular Labral Tears-A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Eoghan T Hurley; Andrew J Hughes; M Shazil Jamal; Edward S Mojica; David A Bloom; Thomas Youm; Tom McCarthy
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-08-18

9.  Hip arthroscopy utilization and reoperation rates in Ontario: a population-based analysis comparing different age cohorts.

Authors:  Ryan M Degen; J Andrew McClure; Britney Le; Blayne Welk; Brent Lanting; Jacquelyn D Marsh
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 2.089

10.  Indications and Outcomes for Arthroscopic Hip Labral Reconstruction With Autografts: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Felipe S Bessa; Brady T Williams; Evan M Polce; Mansueto Neto; Flávio L Garcia; Gustavo Leporace; Leonardo Metsavaht; Jorge Chahla
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2020-10-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.