OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the burden experienced by primary informal caregivers of patients who have undergone hip arthroscopy and to identify factors that predict increased caregiver burden.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at a single academic hospital centre, enroling caregivers of patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between November 2018 and November 2023. Caregiver burden was assessed using the Caregiver Burden Inventory (CBI) survey. Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify predictors of caregiver burden, with the global CBI score serving as the primary outcome measure. Secondarily, open-ended survey questions were analyzed qualitatively to elucidate specific challenges and facilitators of caregiving, as reported by the caregivers themselves.
RESULTS: The study involved 99 eligible caregivers (mean [standard deviation] age; 47 [11] years), 58% were female, and 85% were relatives of the patient. The median global CBI score was 13.0 (interquartile range: 8.0-22.4), indicating a moderate burden. Regression analyses demonstrated that younger caregiver age and a higher number of caregiving tasks were significant predictors of increased global burden. Additionally, nonweightbearing status of patients, female gender of caregivers and working full-time statistically significantly increased specific dimensions of caregiver burden.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the meaningful burden faced by caregivers of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, despite its minimally invasive nature and outpatient setting. Identified risk factors such as younger caregiver age, female gender of the caregiver, nonweight-bearing status and increased caregiving tasks suggest targeted areas for intervention. The qualitative analysis revealed that caregivers struggle with time management and physical and emotional strain, yet better communication and practical support from healthcare teams could help to alleviate these challenges.
METHODS: Level IV, prognostic study.

BACKGROUND: Physical therapy and orthopaedic surgery are two common treatments for non-arthritic hip pain. Interdisciplinary evaluation across these disciplines may produce a more supportive treatment-planning process; however, the feasibility of such an evaluation remains unknown.
UNASSIGNED: To assess the feasibility of an interdisciplinary evaluation with an orthopaedic surgeon and physical therapist for non-arthritic hip pain.
METHODS: Observational feasibility study of a randomized controlled trial.
METHODS: Participants were randomized to an interdisciplinary (surgeon + physical therapist) or standard (surgeon) evaluation in a hip preservation clinic. Recruitment rate was recorded. Retention rate was calculated for all variables of interest. Enrollment and refusal reasons were recorded as patient quotes and categorized by a single grader. Time spent in clinic was compared across groups using Mann Whitney U tests (P ≤ 0.05). Study clinicians were interviewed, and responses were categorized based on pre-determined themes.
RESULTS: Eighty-one percent of eligible patients enrolled over a 15-month recruitment period. Willingness(n = 16), urgency to resolve pain(n = 10), financial compensation(n = 1), interest in research(n = 42), physical therapy(n = 6), or multiple-provider care(n = 15) were participants\' enrollment reasons; reason was not recorded for 22 participants. Time(n = 11), preference for single-provider care(n = 6), current physical therapy treatment(n = 1), and disinterest in physical therapy(n = 7) or research(n = 2) were refusal reasons of patients who did not enroll. Retention for primary variables of interest was 100% in both groups. Participants spent, on average, 23.5 min more time in clinic for the interdisciplinary evaluation compared to the standard (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: An interdisciplinary evaluation for patients with non-arthritic hip pain that included a physical therapist and orthopaedic surgeon in a hip preservation clinic was feasible and may better inform the treatment planning process.

UNASSIGNED: The indications for hip arthroscopy in patients aged ≥40 years remain controversial, as observational studies have suggested that advanced age portends poor functional outcomes, poor durability of improvement, and high rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty.
UNASSIGNED: To compare hip arthroscopy versus nonoperative management for symptomatic labral tears in patients aged ≥40 years with limited radiographic osteoarthritis.
UNASSIGNED: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
UNASSIGNED: This single-surgeon, parallel randomized controlled trial included patients aged ≥40 years with limited osteoarthritis (Tönnis grades 0-2) who were randomized 1:1 to arthroscopic surgery with postoperative physical therapy (SPT) or physical therapy alone (PTA). Patients who received PTA and achieved unsatisfactory improvement were permitted to cross over to SPT after completing ≥14 weeks of physical therapy (CO). The primary outcomes were the International Hip Outcome Tool-33 score and modified Harris Hip Score at 24 months after surgery, and secondary outcomes included other patient-reported outcome measures and the visual analog scale for pain. The primary analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed-effects models. Sensitivity analyses included modified as-treated and treatment-failure analyses.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 97 patients were included, with 52 (53.6%) patients in the SPT group and 45 (46.4%) patients in the PTA group. Of the patients who underwent PTA, 32 (71.1%) patients crossed over to arthroscopy at a mean of 5.10 months (SD, 3.3 months) after physical therapy initiation. In both intention-to-treat and modified as-treated analyses, the SPT group displayed superior mean patient-reported outcome measure and pain scores across the study period for nearly all metrics relative to the PTA group. In the treatment-failure analysis, the SPT and CO groups showed greater improvement across all metrics compared with PTA; however, post hoc analyses revealed no significant differences in improvement between the SPT and CO groups. No significant differences were observed between groups in rates of total hip arthroplasty conversion.
UNASSIGNED: In patients ≥40 years of age with limited osteoarthritis, hip arthroscopy with postoperative physical therapy led to better outcomes than PTA at a 24-month follow-up. However, additional preoperative physical therapy did not compromise surgical outcomes and allowed some patients to avoid surgery. When surgery is indicated, age ≥40 years should not be considered an independent contraindication to arthroscopic acetabular labral repair.
UNASSIGNED: NCT03909178 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

BACKGROUND: Detailed postoperative rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) are still a matter of debate. Adjunctive hip bracing represents a promising tool to improve early patients\' mobilization. To present, the effect of hip brace therapy on postoperative functional outcomes and specific patient individual psychologic factors remains controversially discussed. Consequently, we aimed to report postoperative outcomes focusing on hip function, pain and kinesiophobia between braced and unbraced patients.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized-controlled trial was conducted, including patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS. After exclusion, a final study cohort of 36 patients in the intervention group (postoperative hip brace) and 36 patients in the control group (no hip brace) were compared for kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia), pain (Visual analog scale) and joint function (International Hip Outcome Tool-12) within the first six postoperative months.
RESULTS: Hip arthroscopy significantly improved all patient-reported outcomes in both groups. Intergroup analysis revealed significantly lower levels of kinesiophobia in braced patients at 6-months follow up (30.7 vs. 34.1, p = 0.04) while not negatively affecting pain and joint function. No intra- and postoperative complications occurred within both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This study could demonstrate that bracing after hip arthroscopy can positively influence kinesiophobia, while the brace did not negatively impact postoperative pain and quality of life. Thus, hip bracing could be a viable assistive therapy in the postoperative rehabilitation phase after hip arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: A periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is often sufficient to treat the symptoms and improve quality of life for symptomatic hip dysplasia. However, acetabular cartilage and labral pathologies are very commonly present, and there is a lack of evidence examining the benefits of adjunct arthroscopy to treat these. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of patients undergoing PAO with and without arthroscopy, with the primary end point being the International Hip Outcome Tool-33 at 1 year.
METHODS: In a multicenter study, 203 patients who had symptomatic hip dysplasia were randomized: 97 patients undergoing an isolated PAO (mean age 27 years [range, 16 to 44]; mean body mass index of 25.1 [range, 18.3 to 37.2]; 86% women) and 91 patients undergoing PAO who had an arthroscopy (mean age 27 years [range, 16 to 49]; mean body mass index of 25.1 [17.5 to 25.1]; 90% women).
RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 2.3 years (range, 1 to 5), all patients exhibited improvements in their functional score, with no significant differences between PAO plus arthroscopy versus PAO alone at 12 months postsurgery on all scores: preoperative International Hip Outcome Tool-33 score of 31.2 (standard deviation [SD] 16.0) versus 36.4 (SD 15.9), and 12 months postoperative score of 72.4 (SD 23.4) versus 73.7 (SD 22.6). The preoperative Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome pain score was 60.3 (SD 19.6) versus 66.1 (SD 20.0) and 12 months postoperative 88.2 (SD 15.8) versus 88.4 (SD 18.3). The mean preoperative physical health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System score was 42.5 (SD 8.0) versus 44.2 (SD 8.8) and 12 months postoperative 48.7 (SD 8.5) versus 52.0 (SD 10.6). There were 4 patients with PAO without arthroscopy who required an arthroscopy later to resolve persistent symptoms, and 1 patient from the PAO plus arthroscopy group required an additional arthroscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial has failed to show any significant clinical benefit in performing hip arthroscopy at the time of the PAO at 1-year follow-up. Longer follow-up will be required to determine if hip arthroscopy provides added value to a PAO for symptomatic hip dysplasia.

UNASSIGNED: The indirect head of the rectus femoris (IHRF) tendon has been used as an autograft for segmental labral reconstruction. However, the biomechanical properties and anatomic characteristics of the IHRF, as they relate to surgical applications, have yet to be investigated.
UNASSIGNED: To (1) quantitatively and qualitatively describe the anatomy of IHRF and its relationship with surrounding arthroscopically relevant landmarks; (2) detail radiographic findings pertinent to IHRF; (3) biomechanically assess segmental labral reconstruction with IHRF, including restoration of the suction seal and contact pressures in comparison with iliotibial band (ITB) reconstruction; and (4) assess potential donor-site morbidity caused by graft harvesting.
UNASSIGNED: Descriptive laboratory study.
UNASSIGNED: A cadaveric study was performed using 8 fresh-frozen human cadaveric full pelvises and 7 hemipelvises. Three-dimensional anatomic measurements were collected using a 3-dimensional coordinate digitizer. Radiographic analysis was accomplished by securing radiopaque markers of different sizes to the evaluated anatomic structures of the assigned hip.Suction seal and contact pressure testing were performed over 3 trials on 6 pelvises under 4 different testing conditions for each specimen: intact, labral tear, segmental labral reconstruction with ITB, and segmental labral reconstruction with IHRF. After IHRF tendon harvest, each full pelvis had both the intact and contralateral hip tested under tension along its anatomic direction to assess potential site morbidity, such as tendon failure or bony avulsion.
UNASSIGNED: The centroid and posterior apex of the indirect rectus femoris attachment are respectively located 10.3 ± 2.6 mm and 21.0 ± 6.5 mm posteriorly, 2.5 ± 7.8 mm and 0.7 ± 8.0 mm superiorly, and 5.0 ± 2.8 mm and 22.2 ± 4.4 mm laterally to the 12:30 labral position. Radiographically, the mean distance of the IHRF to the following landmarks was determined as follows: anterior inferior iliac spine (8.8 ± 2.5 mm), direct head of the rectus femoris (8.0 ± 3.9 mm), 12-o\'clock labral position (14.1 ± 2.8 mm), and 3-o\'clock labral position (36.5 ± 4.4 mm). During suction seal testing, both the ITB and the IHRF reconstruction groups had significantly lower peak loads and lower energy to peak loads compared with both intact and tear groups (P = .01 to .02 for all comparisons). There were no significant differences between the reconstruction groups for peak loads, energy, and displacement at peak load. In 60° of flexion, there were no differences in normalized contact pressure and contact area between ITB or IHRF reconstruction groups (P > .99). There were no significant differences between intact and harvested specimen groups in donor-site morbidity testing.
UNASSIGNED: The IHRF tendon is within close anatomic proximity to arthroscopic acetabular landmarks. In the cadaveric model, harvesting of the IHRF tendon as an autograft does not lead to significant donor-site morbidity in the remaining tendon. Segmental labral reconstruction performed with the IHRF tendon exhibits similar biomechanical outcomes compared with that performed with ITB.
UNASSIGNED: This study demonstrates the viability of segmental labral reconstruction with an IHRF tendon and provides a detailed anatomic description of the tendon in the context of an arthroscopic labral reconstruction. Clinicians can use this information during the selection of a graft and as a guide during an arthroscopic graft harvest.

UNASSIGNED: Although several studies have noted that patients are routinely overprescribed opioids, few have reported usage after arthroscopic surgery.
UNASSIGNED: To determine opioid consumption and allocation for unused opioids after common arthroscopic surgeries.
UNASSIGNED: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
UNASSIGNED: Patients between the ages of 15 and 40 years who were scheduled to undergo anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), labral repair of the hip or shoulder, meniscectomy, or meniscal repair were prospectively enrolled. Patients were prescribed either 5 mg hydrocodone-325 mg acetaminophen or 5 mg oxycodone-325 mg acetaminophen based on surgeon preference. Patients completed a daily opioid usage survey during the 2-week postoperative period. In addition, patients completed a survey on postoperative day 21 inquiring about continued opioid use and medication disposal, if applicable. Opioid medication consumption was converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs).
UNASSIGNED: Of the 200 patients who were enrolled in the study, 176 patients had sufficient follow-up after undergoing 85 (48%) ACLR, 26 (14.8%) hip labral repair, 34 (19.3%) shoulder labral repair, 18 (10.2%) meniscectomy, and 13 (7.4%) meniscal repair procedures. Mean age was 26.1 years (SD, 7.38); surgeons prescribed a mean of 26.6 pills whereas patients reported consuming a mean of 15.5 pills. The mean MME consumption in the 14 days after each procedure was calculated: ACLR (95.7; 44% of prescription), hip labral repair (84.8; 37%), shoulder labral repair (57.2; 35%), meniscectomy (18.4; 27%), and meniscal repair (32.1; 42%). This corresponded to approximately 39% of the total opioid prescription being utilized across all procedures. Mean MME consumption was greatest on postoperative day 1 in hip, shoulder, and meniscal procedures and on postoperative day 2 in ACLR. Only 7.04% of patients reported continued opioid use in the third postoperative week. Patients had a mean of 11 unused pills or 77.7 MMEs remaining. Of the patients with remaining medication, 24.7% intended to keep their medication for future use.
UNASSIGNED: The results of our study indicate that patients who undergo the aforementioned arthroscopic procedures consume <75 MMEs in the 2-week postoperative period, translating into a mean of 10 to 15 pills consumed. Approximately 60% of total opioids prescribed went unused, and one-fourth of patients intended to keep their remaining medication for future usage. We have provided general prescribing guidelines and recommend that surgeons carefully consider customizing their opioid prescriptions on the basis of procedure site to balance optimal postoperative analgesia with avoidance of dissemination of excess opioids.

UNASSIGNED: Patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) and concomitant femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) have demonstrated similar outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up compared with equivalent patients without dysplasia. However, comparisons between these groups at long-term follow-up have yet to be investigated.
UNASSIGNED: To compare long-term clinical outcomes between patients with BHD undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS versus matched control patients without BHD.
UNASSIGNED: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with BHD (lateral center-edge angle, 18°-25°) who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS between January 2012 and February 2013. Patients were propensity matched in a 1:3 ratio by age, sex, and body mass index to control patients without BHD who underwent primary hip arthroscopy. Groups were compared in terms of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) preoperatively and at 10 years postoperatively, including the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) and Sports subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score, 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction. Achievement rates for minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were assessed between groups.
UNASSIGNED: At a mean follow-up of 10.3 ± 0.3 years, 28 patients with BHD (20 women; age, 30.8 ± 10.8 years) were matched to 84 controls who underwent primary hip arthroscopy. Both groups significantly improved from preoperative assessment in all PRO measures at 10 years (P < .001 for all). PRO scores were similar between groups, aside from HOS-SS (BHD, 62.9 ± 31.9 vs controls, 80.1 ± 26.0; P = .030). Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups for all PROs (HOS-ADL: BHD, 76.2% vs controls, 67.9%, P = .580; HOS-SS: BHD, 63.2% vs controls, 69.4%, P = .773; modified Harris Hip Score: BHD, 76.5% vs controls, 67.9%, P = .561; VAS pain: BHD, 75.0% vs controls, 91.7%, P = .110). Rates of PASS achievement were significantly lower in the BHD group for HOS-ADL (BHD, 39.1% vs controls, 77.4%; P = .002), HOS-SS (BHD, 45.5% vs controls, 84.7%; P = .001), and VAS pain (BHD, 50.0% vs controls, 78.5%; P = .015). No significant difference was found in the rate of subsequent reoperation on the index hip between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated comparable survivorship at long-term follow-up (P = .645).
UNASSIGNED: After primary hip arthroscopy, patients with BHD in the setting of FAIS had significantly improved PRO scores at 10-year follow-up, comparable with propensity-matched controls without BHD. Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups, although patients with BHD had lower rates of PASS achievement. Patients with BHD had similar long-term hip arthroscopy survivorship compared with controls, with no significant difference in rates of revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

UNASSIGNED: Patients undergoing arthroscopic hip surgery (AHS) require good analgesia and early rehabilitation after surgery, and there is no consensus on the optimal nerve block. We aimed to compare the efficacy of the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) block compared to fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) in patients with AHS.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 80 patients receiving AHS under general anesthesia were randomized to receive either FICB (group F) or PENG block in combination with LFCN block (group P). The primary outcomes were the rate of quadriceps weakness after block on the afflicted side, as well as muscle strength grading and pain score after block, and the quality of recovery on the second postoperative day.
UNASSIGNED: Compared with group F, group P had a lower incidence of quadriceps weakness 48 h after block (76.9% vs 28.2%, P < 0.001), and had less impact on muscle strength grade and lower static pain score at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 h after block (P < 0.001), and a lower dynamic pain score at 6 and 12 h after block in group P (p < 0.05). The quality of recovery on the second postoperative day improved (p < 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: In comparison to FICB, PENG block in combination with LFCN block can affect less quadriceps muscle strength and reduce the use of postoperative analgesics, which is beneficial for the postoperative recovery of AHS patients.

OBJECTIVE: Nontraumatic osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) is commonly encountered in orthopedics. Without early clinical intervention, most patients with peri-collapse of the ONFH will develop femoral head necrosis and eventually require hip replacement surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with ONFH who underwent \"light bulb\" core decompression (CD) with arthroscopic assistance and to compare them with the outcomes of those treated with traditional procedures.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with Stage II and IIIA (Peri-collapse) radiographic findings based on the Association Research Circulation Osseous (ARCO) stage for ONFH who underwent \"light bulb\" CD with or without arthroscopic assistance by a single-surgeon team between March 2014 and December 2018 was performed. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 2 years. The visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score, Harris hip score (HHS), and radiological imaging were evaluated. The categorical parameters were analyzed by chi-square test and the continuous variables conforming to a normal distribution were analyzed by Student\'s t-test.
RESULTS: The study included a total of 39 patients (18 and 21 patients in the with and without arthroscopic assistance groups, respectively), with a mean age of 40.3 years and a mean follow-up of 22.2 months. Overall, there was a better VAS score in the arthroscopic assistance group than in the control group (p < 0.05), There was a significant difference in HHS (80.1 ± 9.2 vs 75.1 ± 12.7) at the last follow-up (p < 0.05). The rate of good and excellent outcomes was 94%. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the total rate of complications or conversion to THA.
CONCLUSIONS: With arthroscopic assistance, \"light bulb\" CD could be achieved via hip arthroscopy with less trauma, and it offered the opportunity for more precise evaluation and monitoring for therapy and yielded better VAS scores after surgery and better hip function outcomes at the last follow-up.