2014 – Domb et al. Arthroscopic Labral Base Repair in the Hip: Clinical Results of a Described Technique.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a cohort of patients who underwent labral repair by use of a previously published labral base repair suture technique for the treatment of acetabular labral tears and pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI)
Methods: Patients who received hip arthroscopy for symptomatic intra-articular hip disorders and underwent the previously described labral base repair technique were included in the study group. Patients who had Tönnis arthritis grade 2 or greater, had Legg-Calves-Perthes disease, or underwent simple looped stitch repair were excluded. The patient-reported outcome scores included the modified Harris Hip Score, the Non-Arthritic Hip Score, the Hip Outcome Score eActivities of Daily Living, and the Hip Outcome Score eSport-Specific Sub-scale obtained preoperatively and at 2 years ’and 3 years’follow-up. Any complications, revision surgeries, and conversions to total hip arthroplasty were noted.
Results: Of the patients, 54 (82%) were available for follow-up. The mean length of follow-up for this cohort was 2.4 years (range, 1.7 to 4.1 years). At final follow-up, there was significant improvement in all 4 patient-reported outcome scores (modified Harris Hip Score, 63.7 to 89.9; Non-Arthritic Hip Score, 60.9 to 87.9; Hip Outcome Score eActivities of Daily Living, 66.9 to 91.0; and Hip Outcome Score eSport-Specific Subscale, 46.5 to 79.2) (P< .0001). A good or excellent result was achieved in 46 patients (85.2%). There was significant improvement in pain as measured by the change in visual analog scale score from 6.5 to 2.3 (P<.0001), and the patient satisfaction rating was 8.56 2.01. There were no perioperative complications. Revision surgery was required in 3 patients (5.6%), and 2 patients (3.7%) required conversion to total hip arthroplasty.
Conclusions: The clinical results of this labral base repair technique showed favorable clinical improvements based on 4 patient-reported outcome questionnaires, visual analog scale, and patient satisfaction. More clinical, biomechanical, and histologic studies are needed to determine the optimal repair technique.
Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic case series.