Literature DB >> 31413682

Rates and Risk Factors for Revision Hip Arthroscopy.

Christopher R West1, Nicholas A Bedard1, Kyle R Duchman1, Robert W Westermann1, John J Callaghan1.   

Abstract

Background: Revision hip arthroscopy often serves as a measure for a failed primary hip arthroscopy procedure. The purpose of this study was to examine the rate, timing, and risk factors for revision hip arthroscopy using a large national database.
Methods: The Humana administrative claims dataset was reviewed from 2007 through the second quarter of 2015 to identify patients undergoing hip arthroscopy using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and laterality modifiers. Patients with subsequent ipsilateral revision hip arthroscopy were identified and the rate and timing of these revisions determined. Subgroup analysis was performed to determine effects of gender, age, body mass index (BMI), osteoarthritis diagnosis, and specific hip arthroscopy procedure on revision rates.
Results: There were 1807 hip arthroscopy procedures identified with a revision rate of 4% (total of 72 procedures). Of the revision procedures, 43% occurred within 6 months after the index procedure, and 86% occurred within 18 months. Age < 50 years was the only significant predictor of revision hip arthroscopy (OR 2.03, CI 1.173.53) with an even distribution across younger age groups. An osteoarthritis diagnosis, gender, and BMI did not represent significant risk factors for revision (OR 0.87, 0.98, 0.9 and CI 0.5-1.51, CI 0.6-1.59, CI 0.37-2.12, respectively). Chondroplasty was the most common procedure leading to revision (46%) followed by labral repair (37%). The most common revision procedures were chondroplasty (44%) followed by femoroplasty (38%). Conclusions: Overall, 4% of hip arthroscopy procedures underwent revision arthroscopy over the 8-year period. Revision was associated with age < 50, and revisions were most frequently performed for femoroacetabular impingement. The majority of revisions occurred within 18 months after the index procedure.Level of Evidence: IV.

Entities:  

Keywords:  femoroacetabular impingement; hip; hip arthroscopy; hip replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31413682      PMCID: PMC6604537     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Iowa Orthop J        ISSN: 1541-5457


  21 in total

1.  Trends in hip arthroscopy.

Authors:  Alexis Chiang Colvin; John Harrast; Christopher Harner
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  What Are the Risk Factors for Revision Surgery After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement at 7-year Followup?

Authors:  Pascal Cyrill Haefeli; Christoph Emanuel Albers; Simon Damian Steppacher; Moritz Tannast; Lorenz Büchler
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Does Primary Hip Arthroscopy Result in Improved Clinical Outcomes?: 2-Year Clinical Follow-up on a Mixed Group of 738 Consecutive Primary Hip Arthroscopies Performed at a High-Volume Referral Center.

Authors:  Asheesh Gupta; John M Redmond; Christine E Stake; Kevin F Dunne; Benjamin G Domb
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 6.202

4.  Hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement in patients aged 50 years or older.

Authors:  Marc J Philippon; Bruno G Schroder E Souza; Karen K Briggs
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2011-10-07       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  Joint space predicts THA after hip arthroscopy in patients 50 years and older.

Authors:  Marc J Philippon; Karen K Briggs; John C Carlisle; Diana C Patterson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Matched-Cohort Study Comparing Revision to Primary Arthroscopy Patients.

Authors:  Justin T Newman; Karen K Briggs; Shannen C McNamara; Marc J Philippon
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  Prospective analysis of hip arthroscopy with 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  J W Byrd; K S Jones
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 8.  Revision Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of Diagnoses, Operative Findings, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Gregory L Cvetanovich; Joshua D Harris; Brandon J Erickson; Bernard R Bach; Charles A Bush-Joseph; Shane J Nho
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 4.772

9.  Complication Rates for Hip Arthroscopy Are Underestimated: A Population-Based Study.

Authors:  Jeremy N Truntzer; Daniel J Hoppe; Lauren M Shapiro; Geoffrey D Abrams; Marc Safran
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.772

10.  When Hip Scopes Fail, They Do So Quickly.

Authors:  Nicholas A Bedard; Andrew J Pugely; Kyle R Duchman; Robert W Westermann; Yubo Gao; John J Callaghan
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Approach to a Failed Hip Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Michelle E Arakgi; Ryan M Degen
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2020-06

2.  Obesity is associated with less favorable outcomes following hip arthroscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yuichi Kuroda; Shingo Hashimoto; Masayoshi Saito; Shinya Hayashi; Naoki Nakano; Takehiko Matsushita; Takahiro Niikura; Ryosuke Kuroda; Tomoyuki Matsumoto
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Limited clinical utility of a machine learning revision prediction model based on a national hip arthroscopy registry.

Authors:  R Kyle Martin; Solvejg Wastvedt; Jeppe Lange; Ayoosh Pareek; Julian Wolfson; Bent Lund
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 4.114

4.  Is the Actual Failure Rate of Hip Arthroscopy Higher Than Most Published Series? An Analysis of a Private Insurance Database.

Authors:  Jacqueline E Baron; Robert W Westermann; Nicholas A Bedard; Michael C Willey; T S Lynch; Kyle R Duchman
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2020

5.  Clinical outcomes after revision hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) are inferior compared to primary procedures. Results from the Danish Hip Arthroscopy Registry (DHAR).

Authors:  Bjarne Mygind-Klavsen; Torsten Grønbech Nielsen; Bent Lund; Martin Lind
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 6.  Denosumab might prevent periprosthetic bone loss after total hip and knee arthroplasties: a review.

Authors:  Jianda Xu; Huan Li; Yuxing Qu; Chong Zheng; Bin Wang; Pengfei Shen; Zikang Xie; Kang Wei; Yan Wang; Jianning Zhao
Journal:  Arthroplasty       Date:  2021-04-12

7.  Association Between Comorbid Depression and Rates of Postoperative Complications, Readmissions, and Revision Arthroscopic Procedures After Elective Hip Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Ryan D Freshman; Madeleine Salesky; Charles J Cogan; Drew A Lansdown; Alan L Zhang
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-09-07

8.  Association of Preoperative Opioid Use With Complication Rates and Resource Use in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement.

Authors:  Ehab M Nazzal; Jacob M Wilson; Kevin X Farley; Andrew M Schwartz; John W Xerogeanes
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-11-22

9.  Evaluation of primary hip arthroscopy complications in mid-term follow-up: a multicentric prospective study.

Authors:  Petr Zeman; Moheb Rafi; Jakub Kautzner
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 10.  Revision Hip Arthroscopy in the Native Hip: A Review of Contemporary Evaluation and Treatment Options.

Authors:  Kyle N Kunze; Reena J Olsen; Spencer W Sullivan; Benedict U Nwachukwu
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2021-07-05
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.