Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
Published in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 3/2019

01-09-2019 | Wound Debridement | Femoroacetabular impingement/labral tears (A Zhang, Section Editor)

Surgical Treatment of Labral Tears: Debridement, Repair, Reconstruction

Authors: Dustin Woyski, Richard “Chad” Mather III

Published in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose of Review

With the rapid growth of hip arthroscopy over the past decade, new treatment paradigms as well as recognition of new disease states have sprung forth. The ability to perform complex arthroscopic procedures of the hip such as labral augmentation and reconstruction is essential for hip arthroscopists in the revision setting, with patient selection and indications for various labral treatments the key driver for improved short- and mid-term clinical outcomes.

Recent Findings

Current techniques have been developed to address disease states where the labrum is either unstable, torn, deficient, or otherwise incompetent. Many early reports focused on the description of these techniques with new literature reporting short- and mid-term outcomes. A few of these have demonstrated improved outcomes with a contemporary arthroscopy with emphasis on capsule preservation and repair.

Summary

Studies have demonstrated that labral repair has improved outcomes over labral debridement, with results of labral reconstruction in a revision approaching those of labral repair. In addition, newer reports have shown significantly improved outcomes and survivorship with capsule repair and therefore should be included in every hip arthroscopy.
Literature
1.
Shifrin LZ, Reis ND. Arthroscopy of a dislocated hip replacement: a case report. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;(146):213–4.
2.
Riff AJ, Kunze KN, Movassaghi K, Hijji F, Beck FC, Harris JS, et al. Systematic review of hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: the importance of labral repair and capsular closure. Arthroscopy. 2019;2:e646–56.CrossRef
3.
Seldes RM, Tan V, Hunt J, Katz M, Winiarsky R, Fitzgerald RH Jr. Anatomy histologic features and vascularity of the adult acetabular labrum. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2007;18:497–520.CrossRef
4.
Alzaharani A, Bali K, Gudena R, Railton P, Ponjevic D, Matyas JR, et al. The innervation of the human acetabular labrum and hip joint: an anatomic study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014;15:1–8.CrossRef
5.
• Safran MR. Microinstability of the hip-gaining acceptance. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019;1:12–22 Excellent review on the growing topic of hip microinstability that details the clinical, imaging, and intra-operative findings of patients with hip instability.
6.
Philippon MJ, Nepple JJ, Campbell KJ, Dornan GJ, Jansson KS, LaPrade RF, et al. The hip fluid seal-part I: the effect of an acetabular labral tear, repair, resection, and reconstruction on hip fluid pressurization. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22:722–9.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Nepple JJ, Philippon MJ, Campbell KJ, Dornan GJ, Jansson KS, LaPrade RF, et al. The hip fluid seal-part II: the effect of an acetabular labral tear, repair, resection, and reconstruction hip stability to distraction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22:730–6.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Schmaranzer F, Haefeli PC, Hanke MS, Liechti EF, Werlen SF, Siebenrock KA, et al. How does the dGEMERIC index change after surgical treatment for FAI? A prospective controlled study: preliminary results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475:1080–99.CrossRefPubMed
9.
• Beaulé PE, Speirs AD, Anwander H, Melkus G, Rakhra K, Frei H, et al. Surgical correction of cam deformity in association with femoroacetabular impingement and its impact on the degenerative process within the hip joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;16:1373–81 First study to demonstrate through T 1 rho imaging that surgical correction of CAM deformity results in improvement of hip joint biomechanics and decreases acetabular bone mineral density. CrossRef
10.
Chandrasekaran S, Vemula SP, Linder D, Lodhia P, Suarez-Ahedo C, Domb BG. Preoperative delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage (dGEMERIC) for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy: indices are predictive of magnitude of improvement in two-year patient reported outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;(16):1305–15.
11.
Martin HD, Palmer IJ. History and physical examination of the hip: the basics. Curr Rev Musculoskeletal Med. 2013;6(3):219–25.CrossRef
12.
Hoppe DJ, Truntzer JN, Shapiro LM, Abrams GD, Safran MR. Diagnostic accuracy of 3 physical examination tests in the assessment of hip microinstability. Orthop J Sports Med. 2017;(11):1–6.
13.
Clohisy JC, Carlisle JC, Beaulé PE, Kim Y-J, Trousdale RT, Sierra RJ, et al. A systematic approach to the plain radiographic evaluation of the young adult hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(Suppl 4):47–66.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Parvizi J, Bican O, Bender B, Martazavi SM, Purtill KK, Erickson K, Peters C. Arthroscopy for labral tears in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip a cautionary note. J Arthroplast 2009;Suppl 6:110–113.
15.
• Su AW, Hillen TJ, Eutsler EP, Bedi A, Ross JR, Larson CM, et al. Low-dose computed tomography reduces radiation exposure by 90% compared with traditional computed tomography among patients undergoing hip-preservation surgery. Arthroscopy. 2019;5:1385–92 Increased patient safety and reduction of exposure to radiation can be easily achieved with a low-dose CT protocol.CrossRef
16.
Chandrasekaran S, Lodhia P, Suarez-Ahedo C, Vemula SP, Martin TJ, Domb BG. Symposium: evidence for the use of intra-articular cortisone or hyaluronic acid injection in the hip. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2015;(1):5–15.
17.
Lynch TS, Steinhaus ME, Popkin CA, Ahmad CS, Rosneck J. Outcomes after diagnostic hip injection. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(8):1702–11.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Khan W, Khan M, Alradwan H, Williams R, Simunovic N, Ayeni OR. Utility of intra-articular hip injections for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. Orthop J Sports Med. 2015;(9):1–9.
19.
Grant LF, Cooper DJ, Conroy JL. The HAPI ‘hip arthroscopy pre-habilitation intervention’ study: does pre-habilitation affect outcomes in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoro-acetabular impingement? J Hip Preserv Surg. 2017;4:85–92.PubMedPubMedCentral
20.
•• Griffin DR, Dickenson EJ, Wall PDH, UK FASHIoN group. Hip arthroscopy versus best conservative care for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (UK FASHIoN): a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;10136:2225–35 One of two randomized controlled trials of surgical intervention versus physiotherapy in the UK. Demonstrated that both groups showed improvement in hip-related quality of life but that arthroscopy led to a statistically significantly larger improvement when compared with hip therapy alone. CrossRef
21.
•• Palmer AJR, Ayyar Gupta V, Fernquest S, FAIT Study Group. Arthroscopic hip surgery compared with physiotherapy and activity modification for the treatment of symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement: multicenter randomized controlled trial. BMJ. 2019;364:I185 The second of two randomized controlled trials comparing hip arthroscopy with physiotherapy. Both groups saw improvement in their HOS-ADL score but arthroscopy showed a mean 10.0-point higher improvement when compared with physiotherapy. CrossRef
22.
Byrd JW, Jones KS. Hip arthroscopy for labral pathology: prospective analysis with 10-year follow-up. Arthroscopy. 2009;25(4):365–8.CrossRefPubMed
23.
• Krych AJ, Thompson M, Knutson Z, Scoon J, Coleman SH. Arthroscopic labral repair versus selective labral debridement in female patients with femoroacetabular impingement: a prospective randomized study. Arthroscopy. 2013;1:46–53 The first randomized controlled trial comparing labral debridement with labral repair. Both HOS-ADL and HOS-SSS were significantly higher in the repair group post-operatively at a mean 32-month (12–48) follow-up. However, there was a low number of patients (36 total) and they were all female. CrossRef
24.
Larson CM, Giveans MR, Stone RM. Arthroscopic debridement versus refixation of the acetabular labrum associated with femoroacetabular impingement: mean 3.5-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(5):1015–21.CrossRefPubMed
25.
•• Menge TJ, Briggs KK, Dornan GJ, McNamara SC, Philippon MJ. Survivorship and outcomes 10 years following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: labral debridement compared with labral repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;12:997–1004 First reports of long-term outcomes of labral repair which is compared to a similar cohort of labral debridement patients. Study also demonstrates the importance of patient selection with 89% of patients with ≤ 2mm of joint space had a THA within 10 years compared with 15% of those with > 2 mm of joint space. CrossRef
26.
Sawyer GA, Briggs KK, Dornan GJ, Ommen ND, Philippon MJ. Clinical outcomes after arthroscopic hip labral repair using looped versus pierced suture techniques. Am J Sports Med. 2015;43(7):1683–8.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Weber AE, Kuhns BD, Cvetanovich GL, Grzybowski JS, Salata MJ, Nho SJ. Amateur and recreational athletes return to sport at a high rate following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy. 2017;33(4):748–55.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Frangiamore SJ, Mannava S, Briggs KK, McNamara S, Philippon MJ. Career length and performance among professional baseball players returning to play after hip arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(11):2588–93.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Menge TJ, Bhatia S, McNamar SC, Briggs KK, Philippon MJ. Femoroacetabular impingement in professional football players:return to play and predictors of career length after hip arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(8):1740–4.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Begly JP, Buckley PS, Utsunomiya H, Briggs KK, Philippon MJ. Femoroacetabular impingement in professional basketball players: return to play, career length, and performance after hip arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(13):3090–6.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Lee S, Cvetanovich GL, Mascarenhas R, Wuertz TH, Mather RC, Bush-Joseph CA, et al. Ability to return to work without restriction in workers compensation patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2016;1:30–8.
32.
Perets I, Chaharbakhshi EO, Mu B, Ashberg L, Battaglia MR, Yuen LC, et al. Hip arthroscopy in patients ages 50 years or older: minimum 5-year outcomes, survivorship and risk factors for conversion to total hip replacement. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(11):3001–9.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Capogna BM, Ryan MK, Begly JP, Chenard KE, Mahure SA, Youm T. Clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy in patients 60 or older: a minimum of 2-year follow up. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(12):2505–10.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Philippon MJ, Briggs KK, Hay CJ, Kuppersmith DA, Dewing CB, Huang MJ. Arthroscopic labral reconstruction in the hip using iliotibial band autograft: technique and early outcomes. Arthroscopy. 2010;6:750–6.CrossRef
35.
Rahi R, Mazek J. Arthroscopic acetabular labral reconstruction with rectus femoris tendon autograft: our experiences and early results. J Orthop. 2018;(3):783–6.
36.
Matsuda DK, Burchette RJ. Arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction with a gracilis autograft versus labral refixation: 2-year minimum outcomes. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(5):980–7.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Redmond JM, Cregar WM, Martin TJ, Vemula SP, Gupta A, Domb BG. Arthroscopic labral reconstruction of the hip using semitendinosus allograft. Arthrosc Tech. 2015;4:e323–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Chandrasekaran S, Darwish N, Close MR, Lodhia P, Suarez-Ahedo C, Domb BG. Arthroscopic reconstruction of semental defects of the hip labrum: results in 22 patients with mean 2-year follow-up. Arthroscopy. 2017;33(9):1685–93.CrossRefPubMed
39.
• Scanaliato JP, Christensen DL, Salfiti C, Herzog MM, Wolff AB. Primary circumferential acetabular labral reconstruction: achieving outcomes similar to primary labral repair despite more challenging patient characteristics. Am J Sports Med. 2018;9:2079–88 Report on a linear collection of patients that had underwent labral reconstruction that was compared with labral repair patients during the same time period. Labral reconstruction patients were older, had higher body mass index, and had more severe pathology when compared with the labral repair patients. Despite this, both groups showed significant improvements in all patient-reported outcomes and there was no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the two groups. CrossRef
40.
White BJ, Stapleford AB, Hawkes TK, Finger MJ, Herzog MM. Allograft use in arthroscopic labral reconstruction of the hip with front-to-back fixation technique: minimum 2-year follow-up. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(1):26–32.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Matsuda DK, Burchette RJ. Arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction with a gracilis autograft versus labral refixation: 2-year minimum outcomes. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(5):980–7.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Cadet ER, Chan AK, Vorys GC, Gardner T, Yin B. Investigation of the preservation of the fluid seal effect in the repaired, partially resected and reconstructed acetabular labrum in a cadaveric hip model. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(10):2218–23.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Locks R, Chahla J, Frank JM, Anavian J, Godin JA, Philippon MJ. Arthroscopic hip labral augmentation technique with iliotibial band graft. Arthosc Tech. 2017;6(2):e351–6.CrossRef
44.
Philippon MJ, Bolia IK, Locks R, Briggs KK. Labral preservation: outcomes following labrum augmentation versus labrum reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(9):2604–11.CrossRefPubMed
45.
• Mehta N, Chamberlin P, Marx RG, Hidaka C, Ge Y, Nawabi DH, et al. Defining the learning curve for hip arthroscopy: a threshold analysis of the volume-outcomes relationship. Am J Sports Med. 2018;6:1284–93 This study compared 5-year reoperation rates in hip arthroscopy patients among surgeons with varying experience. Stunningly, there was a significant difference in reoperation rates found between the high volume (389–518 cases) and the highest (> 519) cases (10.1% and 2.6% respectively). Emphasizes the importance of through hip arthroscopy training and experience and should not be undertaken by the inexperienced surgeon. CrossRef
46.
Gil JA, Waryasz GR, Owens BD, Daniels AH. Variability of arthroscopy case volume in orthopaedic surgery residency. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(5):892–7.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Ross JR, Larson CM, Adeoye O, Kelly BT, Bedi A. Residual deformity is the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy: a three-dimensional CT study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473:1388–95.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Clohisy JC, Nepple JJ, Larson CM, Zaltz I, Millis M. Persistent structural disease is the most common cause of repeat hip preservation surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:3788–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
49.
Huard J, Bolia I, Briggs K, Utsunomiya H, Loew WR, Philippon MJ. Potential usefulness of losartan as an antifibrotic agent and adjeunct to platelet-rich plasma therapy to improve muscle healing and cartilage repair and prevent adhesion formation. Orthopedics. 2018;41(5):e591–7.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Buly RL, Sosa BR, Pultsides LA, Caldwell E, Rozbruch SR. Femoral derotation osteotomy in adults for version abnormalities. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2018;26(19):e416–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
51.
• Nho SJ, Beck EC, Nwachukwu BU, Cvetanovich GL, Neal WH, Harris JD, et al. Survivorship and outcome of hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome performed with modern techniques. Am J Sports Med. 2019;7:1662–9 Two-year outcomes of modern surgical techniques of labral repair and capsule closure are reported. An overall failure rate of 3.6% (2.5% revision, 1.2% conversion to THA). 73% of patients reached the MCID.CrossRef
52.
Camp CL, Reardon PJ, Levy BA, Krych AJ. Creating and closing the T-capsulotomy for improved visualization during arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. Arthrosc Tech. 2015;4(6):e731–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
53.
Horisberger M, Brunner A, Herzog RF. Arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:182–90.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Conaway WK, Martin SD. Puncture capsulotomy during hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: preserving anatomy and biomechanics. Arthrosc Tech. 2017;6:e2265–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
55.
Weber AE, Neal WH, Mayer EN, Kuhns BD, Shewman E, Salata MJ, et al. Vertical extension of the T-capsulotomy incision in hip arthroscopi surgery does not affect the force required for hip distraction: effect of capsulotomy size, type and subsequent repair. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(13):3127–33.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Abrams GD, Hart MA, Takami K, Bayne CO, Kelly BT, Espinoza Orias AA, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of capsulotomy, capsulectomy, and capsular repair on hip rotation. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(8):1511–7.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Kraeutler MJ, Strickland CD, Brick MJ, Garabekyan T, Woon JTK, Chadayammuri V, Mei-Dan O. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of repaired versus unrepaired interportal capsulotomy in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. J Hip Preserv Surg 2018;4:349–56, 5, 356.
58.
Domb BG, Chahabakhshi EO, Perets I, Walsh JP, Yuen LC, Ashberg LJ. Patient-reported outcomes of capsular repair versus capsulotomy in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy: minimum 5-year follow-up-a matched comparison study. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(3):853–63.CrossRefPubMed
59.
•• Bolia IK, Fagotti L, Briggs KK, Philippon MJ. Midterm outcomes following repair of capsulotomy versus nonrepair in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement with labral repair. Arthroscopy. 2019, 1828;6:–1834 One of multiple reports demonstrating improved mid-term outcomes of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy that had capsular closure versus unrepaired capsule. A higher percentage of patients in the repaired group met MCID compared with the unrepaired group. And the unrepaired group was 6.8 times more likely to have had a THA.
60.
61.
Aoki SK, Karns MR, Hananouchi T, Todd DC. Hip arthroscopy capsular closure: the figure of eight technique. Arthroscopy. 2017;6(2):e505–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Surgical Treatment of Labral Tears: Debridement, Repair, Reconstruction
Authors
Dustin Woyski
Richard “Chad” Mather III
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine / Issue 3/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1935-9748
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-019-09575-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 3/2019 Go to the issue

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (W Hsu, Section Editor)

Transforaminal full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy under local anesthesia in awake and aware conditions: the inside-out and outside-in techniques

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (W Hsu, Section Editor)

Economic Value in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (W Hsu, Section Editor)

A Systematic Review of Complications Following Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery Including Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (W Hsu, Section Editor)

Lateral and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion—Current Concepts and a Review of Recent Literature

Outcomes Research in Orthopedics (O Ayeni, Section Editor)

Outcome After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision

Femoroacetabular impingement/labral tears (A Zhang, Section Editor)

Contemporary Management of the Hip Capsule During Arthroscopic Hip Preservation Surgery