2021 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster
Outcomes Of Revision Hip Arthroscopy Are Unaffected By Intraoperative Findings: A Matched Cohort Study
Hari Krishna Ankem, MD, Louisville, KENTUCKY UNITED STATES
Samantha Diulus, BS, Des Plaines, Illinois UNITED STATES
Cynthia Kyin, BA, Des Plaines, Illinois UNITED STATES
Jacob Shapira, MD, Des Plaines UNITED STATES
Philip Joseph Rosinsky, MD, Skokie, IL UNITED STATES
Mitchell Meghpara, MD, Austin, TX UNITED STATES
Ajay C. Lall, MD, MS, FAAOS, Paramus, New Jersey UNITED STATES
Benjamin G. Domb, MD, Chicago, IL UNITED STATES
American Hip Institute Research Foundation, Des Plaines, Illinois, UNITED STATES
FDA Status Cleared
Summary
Patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy with a high-volume surgeon reported significant and comparable improvement in multiple PROs at minimum two-year follow-up irrespective of index procedure findings.
ePosters will be available shortly before Congress
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to compare minimum two-year patient reported outcomes (PROs) following revision hip arthroscopy between two different patient cohorts that had undergone primary hip arthroscopy with the same surgeon (SS) and a different surgeon (DS). We hypothesized no difference in clinical outcomes between the groups despite differences in index procedure findings in a revision setting under a high-volume surgeon.
Methods
Between January 2012 and August 2017, 71 SS patients were matched to 71 DS patients without differences in age, sex, BMI, or follow-up. The outcome scores were collected prospectively for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated for mHHS and HOS-SSS.
Results
Labral tears were present in 100% and femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) from residual bony deformity in 94.4% of DS patients (P < .001). The SS and DS groups demonstrated significant and comparable improvement in mHHS (? = 18.28 ± 21.50 vs. 19.02 ± 20.08; P = 0.837), NAHS (? = 18.81 ± 18.83 vs. 18.19 ± 18.84; P = 0.850), and HOS-SSS (? = 22.00 ± 27.42 vs. 17.51 ± 28.14; P = 0.275). Rates of achieving MCID for mHHS and HOS-SSS were similar. Further, need for revision surgery and conversion to THA were comparable (P = 0.228 and P = 0.383).
Conclusion
Patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy with a high-volume surgeon reported significant and comparable improvement in multiple PROs at minimum two-year follow-up irrespective of index procedure findings.