2011 – Domb et al. Open Surgical Dislocation Versus Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement a Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Systematic Review.
Purpose: Over the last decade, the surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has evolved as surgical techniques through arthroscopy, open surgical dislocation, and combined ap- proaches have been developed. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the clinical results of available surgical approaches for FAI
Methods: A review of the literature was performed through the PubMed database and related articles’ reference lists. Inclusion criteria were (1) all patients treated for FAI, (2) Level I, II, III, or IV study design, and (3) written in the English language. Case reports and studies involving patients with acetabular dysplasia were excluded.
Results: Overall, 1,299 articles fit our keyword search criteria. Of these, 26 articles reported clinical outcomes, using 3 surgical modalities: open surgical dislocation, arthroscopic, and combined ap- proaches. In compiling the data in these articles, we analyzed the outcomes of a total 1,462 hips in 1,409 patients. The most published surgical method was arthroscopy, which included 62% of the patients. Labral repair was performed more frequently in open surgical dislocation (45%) and combined approach (41%) procedures than in arthroscopies (23%). Mean improvement in the modified Harris hip score after surgery was 26.4 for arthroscopy, 20.5 for open surgical dislocation, and 12.3 for the combined approach. A higher rate of return to sport was reported for arthroscopy in professional athletes than for open surgical dislocation. Overall complication rates were 1.7% for the arthroscopic group, 9.2% for the open surgical dislocation group, and 16% in the combined approach group.
Conclusions: All 3 surgical approaches led to consistent improvements in patient outcomes. Because a wide variety of subjective hip questionnaires were used, direct comparisons could not be made in many cases, and none of the approaches could be clearly shown to be superior to the others. However, it seems that, overall, the arthroscopic method had the lowest complication and fastest rehabilitation rate
Level of Evidence: Level III, systematic review