2015 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster #803
Hip Arthroscopy in the Setting of Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review
Sebastian Heaven, MD, Hamilton CANADA
Darren L. de SA, MBA(c), MD, FRCSC, Hannon, ON CANADA
Nicole Simunovic, MSc, Hamilton, ON CANADA
Dale Williams, MD, FRCSC, Hamilton CANADA
Douglas Naudie, MD, FRCSC, London, ON CANADA
H Bedair , MD, Hamilton CANADA
Olufemi R. Ayeni, MD, PhD, MSc, FRCSC, Hamilton, ON CANADA
McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, CANADA
FDA Status Not Applicable
Summary: Our systematic review of hip arthroscopy after hip arthroplasty has revealed preliminary evidence supporting its use for a variety of indications. Hip arthroscopy can be a safe and effective method of treating hip arthroplasty.
Hip arthroscopy has traditionally been viewed as a hip preservation procedure performed in patients with native joint pathology. However, as the list of indications for arthroscopic hip intervention grows, further advances are expanding its use. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine existing evidence supporting the use of hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip arthroplasty.
Using predetermined inclusion criteria, three electronic databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed, were searched for articles addressing arthroscopic hip surgery performed in hips containing joint replacement arthroplasties up to, and including, June 4th 2014. Inclusion criteria limited our search to human, English language studies addressing hip arthroscopy in hip arthroplasty patients with clear surgical indications described. Article screening was conducted in duplicate. Reviewer agreement statistics and descriptive statistics of included studies are calculated.
From initial retrieval of 743 studies before duplicate screening, 18 satisfied criteria for inclusion. 11 case series, 6 case reports and 1 prospective cohort study are included. A total of 171 patients underwent hip arthroscopy following previous hip joint arthroplasty. Indications for arthroscopy varied across studies, and included iliopsoas tendinopathy (35.8%), symptomatic hips with no clear diagnosis despite extensive investigation (24.6%), periprosthetic infection (6.4%) and intra-articular loose bodies (3.5%). Follow-up periods ranged from 1 to 108 months, with no patients reported as lost to follow-up. Almost all patients who underwent hip arthroscopy experienced positive outcomes from the procedure.
Our systematic review of hip arthroscopy after hip arthroplasty has revealed preliminary evidence supporting its use for a variety of indications. Hip arthroscopy can be a safe and effective method of treating hip arthroplasty.