Cargando…

Arthroscopic Hip Capsular Repair Improves Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Is Associated With a Decreased Risk of Revision Surgery and Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review to assess the effect of capsular repair compared with nonrepair on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) after hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. METHODS: We initially sear...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Uchida, Soshi, Kizaki, Kazuha, Arjuna, Maharaj S., Murata, Yoichi, Shimozono, Yoshiharu, Miura, Kazutomo, Nakagawa, Koichi, Nakamae, Atsuo, Nakamura, Toshiyasu, Sakai, Tadahiro, Kikugawa, Kazuhiko, Mae, Tatsuo, Tsuda, Eiichi, Tohyama, Harukazu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10579288/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37854131
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2023.100800
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review to assess the effect of capsular repair compared with nonrepair on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) after hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. METHODS: We initially searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed databases, as well as ongoing clinical trials (https://clinicaltrials.gov), on December 15, 2022. The eligibility criteria were randomized controlled trials (Level Ⅰ) and prospective comparative studies (Level II) of patients who underwent capsular repair and nonrepair via hip arthroscopy with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. We registered this protocol a priori on PROSPERO (identification No. CRD42021239306). We assessed the risk of bias using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) appraisal tool. RESULTS: This review included 5 studies with a total of 639 patients (270 with capsular repair [average age, 35.4 years; 41% female patients] and 369 with nonrepair [average age, 37.3 years; 38% female patients]). In the included studies, surgical procedures consisting of labral repair and pincer or cam osteoplasty were performed via hip arthroscopy. The modified Harris Hip Score was measured in all the included studies, and the standardized mean difference in PROMs for capsular repair versus nonrepair in the included studies was 0.42 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20 to 0.63). A sensitivity analysis of randomized controlled trials achieved consistent results (standardized mean difference in PROMs, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.60). Capsular repair was not associated with a reduction in revision surgery (risk difference, –0.02; 95% CI, –0.06 to 0.03; 26 of 270 patients with capsular repair vs 42 of 369 with nonrepair) but was associated with a reduction in conversion to THA (risk difference, –0.05; 95% CI –0.09 to –0.01; 12 of 270 patients with capsular repair vs 38 of 369 with nonrepair). The average Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) score in the included studies was 20. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo capsular repair in conjunction with other arthroscopic hip preservation techniques have better PROMs and a lower incidence of THA conversion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of Level I and II investigations.