Crowe, Matthew M.

Background: The number of hip arthroscopies performed in the United States has grown significantly over the past several decades, with evolving indications and emerging techniques. Purposes: To (1) examine the evolution of hip arthroscopy at 3 tertiary referral centers between 1988 and 2022 and (2) quantify trends in patient demographics and procedures performed. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy at 3 academic centers between 1988 and 2022. Demographic data were collected using standardized forms and operative notes, and intraoperative images were manually reviewed for each patient to determine the specific procedures performed at the time of the hip arthroscopy. Surgical procedures were plotted over time to evaluate trends. Patients were divided into 3 time periods for comparison: early hip arthroscopy from 1988 to 2008, 2009 (the time of the first labral repair in our cohort) to 2015, and 2016 to 2022. Results: A total of 3000 patients (age, 35.7 ± 13.8 years; age range, 10-89 years; female sex, 2109 (70.3%); body mass index, 27.4 ± 6.3 kg/m 2 ) underwent arthroscopic hip procedures between 1988 and 2022. The mean number of cases increased from a mean of 3.2 per year in 1988-2008 to 285.9 per year in 2016-2022 ( P < .001). Labral treatment at the time of primary hip arthroscopy evolved from 100% debridement and 0% repair in 1988-2008 to 5.0% debridement, 94.0% repair, and 1.0% labral reconstruction in 2016-2022 ( P < .001). Cam resection increased from 4.1% in 1988-2008 to 86.9% in 2016-2022 ( P < .001). By 2022, 45 out of 325 cases (13.8%) were revisions. The rate of capsular repair at the time of primary hip arthroscopy increased from 0.0% in 1988-2008 up to 81.0% in 2016-2022. Conclusion: There has been a significant growth of hip arthroscopy volumes as well as a significant transition from use as a tool for diagnosis and labral debridement to procedures restoring native anatomy including labral repair, cam resection, capsular repair, periacetabular osteotomy, and gluteal repair.

Objectives: Medial meniscus posterior root tears (MMPRTs) render the meniscus essentially non-functional, resulting in increased peak contact pressures, reduced forced dissipation, and increased risk of early osteoarthritis. Transtibial root repair has shown promise at restoring meniscus function and improving clinical outcomes; however, a paucity of literature exists evaluating the prognostic clinical and radiographic factors for poor outcomes following isolated meniscus root repair. The purpose of this study was to 1) describe the patient reported clinical outcomes after isolated MMPRT repair at minimum 2-year follow-up, 2) determine the retear and conversion to arthroplasty rates, and 3) identify prognostic factors for clinical outcomes and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) achievement. Methods: Isolated MMPRT repairs from 2010-2020 at three institutions in Rochester, MN; Jacksonville, FL; and Phoenix, AZ were followed prospectively for postoperative Tegner Activity Scale, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, IKDC, Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), subjective improvement and knee preference, and subsequent surgeries at minimum 2-year follow up. PASS for IKDC was set at 69. Demographics, injury characteristics, and surgical details were collected. Results: Eighty-four patients were included in this study (age: 49.7 ± 11.0 years [range: 13-76]; sex: 75.0% female; BMI: 31.6 ± 6.9 kg/m 2 [MH1] ). Forty-five patients (53.6%) had BMI >30 kg/m 2 , and 14 patients (16.7%) reported a history of active smoking (Table 1). Mean medial compartment Outerbridge grade was 2.0 ± 1.1, with 73.8% of patients having grade ≥2 changes. Mean preinjury Tegner score, preoperative VAS at rest, and preoperative VAS with use were 4.6 ± 2.4, 3.6 ± 2.7, and 6.5 ± 2.5, respectively. At final follow-up (mean 3.9 ± 2.0 years), mean Tegner score was 4.3 ± 1.8, mean VAS at rest was 1.2 ± 2.0, and mean VAS with use was 2.3 ± 2.2. There was no significant difference in preinjury vs. postoperative Tegner scores (p = 0.208), and preinjury Tegner was significantly positively correlated with postoperative Tegner (p < 0.001). Significant (p < 0.001) postoperative improvements in both VAS at rest and with use were observed. Mean postoperative IKDC score was 73.3 ± 17.0, and mean FJS was 59.6 ± 27.9 at final follow-up. When asked to rate their knee at final follow-up compared to before surgery on a scale from 0-5 (0 = “significantly worse”, 1 = “mildly worse”, 3 = “unchanged”, 4 = “mildly improved”, 5 = “significantly improved”), the mean score 4.6 ± 0.8. Forty-one patients (74.5%) reported significant improvement, 8 (14.5%) reported mild improvement, 3 (5.5%) reported no change, and 3 (5.5%) reported mild worsening. No patients reported significant worsening. When asked which knee they preferred, 13 patients (26.0%) reported preferring their operated knee, compared to 18 (36.0%) who preferred their nonoperated knee. The remaining 19 patients (38.0%) had no preference for one knee over the other. A summary of all patient reported outcomes is reported in Table 2. At the time of final follow-up, 16 (19.0%) of patients had reached a clinical endpoint. Twenty-nine patients (34.5%) underwent postoperative MRIs at an average of 1.5 ± 1.7 years (range: 0.3-5.9 years) after surgery[MH1] . Twelve of the MRIs (41.4%) were ordered for evaluation of continued pain, while 7 (24.1%) were ordered for new pain or injury, and 10 (34.5%) were ordered for research purposes. Five patients (6.0%) had MRI-confirmed retears of the MMPRT repair at an average of 1.1 ± 1.3 years (range: 0.3-3.4) after surgery[HMMP2] , one of which was in an asymptomatic patient who received a follow-up MRI for research purposes. No patients underwent revision MMPRT repair surgery, and 7 patients (8.3%) progressed to arthroplasty (6 TKA, 1 UKA) at an average of 3.4 ± 4.3 years (range 0.6-12.6), one of whom also sustained a root retear. Therefore, the surgical failure was noted in 11 patients, corresponding to a surgical failure rate of 13.1% in this cohort. Of note, three of the five patients with MRI-confirmed retears had not received any further surgical intervention[MH3] [BA(M4] at the time of final follow-up 2.7, 3.8, and 8.5 years after surgery. Additionally, there were six non-MMPRT revision, non-arthroplasty subsequent surgeries in five patients, and there were three patients (3.6%) who sustained new medial meniscus tears 2.8-, 3.6-, and 5.9-years postoperatively, respectively. A concise summary of clinical endpoints can be found in Table 3 and Table 4. Significantly more females experienced surgical failures than males (17.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.040), and significantly more patients with medial compartment Outerbridge grades ≥2 experienced surgical failure than those with grades <2 (17.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.034). Additionally, patients who failed did have significantly higher mean KL grades than those who did not (1.4 ± 0.9 vs. 0.7 ± 0.7, p = 0.012). There were no other significant differences in the demographic or pathologic characteristics of patients who experienced surgical failure and those who did not. Of note, 37% of patients failed to achieve IKDC PASS, with smoking status associated with a 15-point reduction in IKDC (p=0.010) Conclusions: Patients undergoing transtibial root repair demonstrate restoration of pre-injury activity levels, significant clinical improvements in pain and function, and low surgical failure rates at minimum 2-year follow-up, with 89% of patients reporting subjective improvement after surgery. However, only 63% of patients were able to achieve PASS thresholds, suggesting that while effective, additional research on root repair technical and clinical optimization is warranted.

Purpose To compare the clinical efficacy in the resolution of patellar instability, patient‐reported outcomes (PROs), and complication and reoperation rates between patients who underwent grooveplasty (proximal trochleoplasty) and patients who underwent trochleoplasty as part of a combined patellofemoral stabilization procedure. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed to identify a cohort of patients who underwent grooveplasty and a cohort who underwent trochleoplasty at the time of patellar stabilization. Complications, reoperations, and PRO scores (Tegner, Kujala, and International Knee Documentation Committee scores) were collected at final follow‐up. The Kruskal‐Wallis test and Fisher exact test were performed when appropriate, and P < .05 was considered significant. Results Overall, 17 grooveplasty patients (18 knees) and 15 trochleoplasty patients (15 knees) were included. Seventy‐nine percent of patients were female, and the average follow‐up period was 3.9 years. The mean age at first dislocation was 11.8 years overall; most patients (65%) had more than 10 lifetime instability events and 76% of patients underwent prior knee‐stabilizing procedures. Trochlear dysplasia (Dejour classification) was similar between cohorts. Patients who underwent grooveplasty had a higher activity level ( P = .007) and a higher degree of patellar facet chondromalacia ( P = .008) at baseline. At final follow‐up, no patients had recurrent symptomatic instability after grooveplasty compared with 5 patients in the trochleoplasty cohort ( P = .013). There were no differences in postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee scores ( P = .870), Kujala scores ( P = .059), or Tegner scores ( P = .052). Additionally, there were no differences in complication rates (17% in grooveplasty cohort vs 13% in trochleoplasty cohort, P > .999) or reoperation rates (22% vs 13%, P = .665). Conclusions Proximal trochlear reshaping and removal of the supratrochlear spur (grooveplasty) in patients with severe trochlear dysplasia may offer an alternative strategy to complete trochleoplasty for the treatment of trochlear dysplasia in complex cases of patellofemoral instability. Grooveplasty patients showed less recurrent instability and similar PROs and reoperation rates compared with trochleoplasty patients. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Case: We present a case of a 71-year-old woman with history of left-sided shoulder arthritis who underwent standard total shoulder arthroplasty using a novel hybrid glenoid component. After 3 years, she sustained traumatic dissociation of the interface between the polyethylene face and central titanium post, a unique failure mechanism of the hybrid glenoid component. This was successfully corrected through conversation to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Follow-up after 2 years demonstrated marked improvement in pain and function. Conclusion: Hybrid glenoid components present a unique failure mechanism as compared to traditional glenoid loosening and can be effectively corrected with RSA.