The purpose of this current concepts review is to highlight the evaluation and workup of hamstring injuries, nonoperative treatment options, and surgical decision-making based on patient presentation and injury patterns. Hamstring injuries, which are becoming increasingly recognized, affect professional and recreational athletes alike, commonly occurring after forceful eccentric contraction mechanisms. Injuries occur in the proximal tendon at the ischial tuberosity, in the muscle belly substance, or in the distal tendon insertion on the tibia or fibula. Patients may present with ecchymoses, pain, and weakness. Magnetic resonance imaging remains the gold standard for diagnosis and may help guide treatment. Treatment is dictated by the specific tendon(s) injured, tear location, severity, and chronicity. Many hamstring injuries can be successfully managed with nonoperative measures such as activity modification and physical therapy; adjuncts such as platelet-rich plasma injections are currently being investigated. Operative treatment of proximal hamstring injuries, including endoscopic or open approaches, is traditionally reserved for 2-tendon injuries with >2 cm of retraction, 3-tendon injuries, or injuries that do not improve with 6 months of nonoperative management. Acute surgical treatment of proximal hamstring injuries tends to be favorable. Distal hamstring injuries may initially be managed nonoperatively, although biceps femoris injuries are frequently managed surgically, and return to sport may be faster for semitendinosus injuries treated acutely with excision or tendon stripping in high-level athletes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the literature on patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy after failed hip arthroscopy (PAO-FHA) for (1) patient demographics and hip morphology, (2) changes in preoperative to postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and (3) PROs in comparison to primary periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) patients.
METHODS: A systematic literature search of Pubmed, CINAHL/Medline, and cochrane databases was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The search phrase was \"(periacetabular osteotomy or PAO or rotational osteotomy) and (hip arthroscopy or arthroscopic)\". The titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened for studies on PAO-FHA. Study quality was assessed, and relevant data were collected. A meta-analysis was not performed due to study heterogeneity.
RESULTS: The search identified 7 studies, including 151 hips (148 patients, 93.9% female) undergoing PAO-FHA, out of an initial 593 studies, with three Level IV and four Level III studies. Mean time from hip arthroscopy to PAO ranged from 17.0 to 29.6 months. Heterogenous hip morphologies and radiologic findings prior to PAO were observed, though patients most frequently demonstrated moderate-to-severe dysplasia (mean or median lateral center edge angle < 20°) and minimal osteoarthritis (Tönnis grade 0 or 1). In all 5 studies that reported concomitant procedures with PAO, femoral and/or acetabular osteoplasty was performed via arthroscopy or arthrotomy. Following PAO-FHA, radiographic acetabular coverage and PROs improved in all 6 studies that reported postoperative outcomes. All four comparative studies of primary PAO vs. PAO-FHA included patients with mean or median LCEAs < 20°, reporting mixed outcomes for the optimal treatment approach.
CONCLUSIONS: PAO-FHA is reported in a heterogenous patient population that frequently includes hips with moderate-to-severe dysplasia and minimal osteoarthritis. Regardless of hip morphology or concomitant procedures, all studies that reported postoperative outcomes demonstrated improved PROs following PAO-FHA.
METHODS: Level IV.