Kovachevich, Rudy

AbstractPurposeCurrently, there is a paucity of literature regarding outcomes after isolated labral debridement. The purpose of this study was to (1) report the reoperation rate following isolated labral debridement, (2) report clinical and functional outcomes after labral debridement with a minimum 2‐year follow‐up and (3) identify risk factors for worse clinical and functional outcomes. It was hypothesized that inferior outcomes are associated with an increasing Tönnis grade and those with untreated femoral acetabular impingement (FAI).MethodsThe records of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between 1998 and 2005 were reviewed. Patients with labral tears who underwent isolated arthroscopic labral debridement were identified. Kaplan–Meier estimate of failure (defined as subsequent surgery) was performed for all patients. Patients with minimum 2‐year follow‐up were assessed with Modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS). Univariate analysis was then performed to assess which factors were associated with worse clinical and functional outcomes.ResultsFifty‐nine hips in 57 patients met our inclusion criteria (39 females, 18 males) with a mean age of 46 ± 14 years and mean follow‐up of 5 (range 2–14) years. Overall, 45 % of the hips failed for repeat surgery (20 %) or rating for hip function as abnormal or severely abnormal (25 %). Twelve hips (20 %) required subsequent surgical intervention at a mean 23 (range 6–60) months (7 total hip arthroplasties, 2 open revisions, 3 arthroscopic revisions). Of the remaining hips, mean MHHS was 83.4 ± 19.7, mean HOS ADL score was 83.8 ± 21.3 and mean HOS sport score was 70.6 ± 32.9, with 33 of 41 (75 %) reporting normal or nearly normal current level of function. Univariate analysis revealed that hips with untreated bony impingement (p = 0.01) or requiring concomitant chondroplasty (p = 0.03) had inferior clinical outcome scores.ConclusionsIsolated arthroscopic labral debridement for hip labral tears had 45 % combined poor results when strictly defining failure as repeat surgery or abnormal hip rating. Untreated FAI and concomitant chondroplasty were risk factors for inferior outcome. We recommend concomitant treatment for bony impingement lesions and preservation of the labrum whenever possible.Level of evidenceRetrospective case series, Level IV.

AbstractWhile it is generally accepted that most partial and isolated medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries can be treated non‐operatively, ideal treatment of the MCL in multi‐ligament knee injuries remains controversial. High failure rates with repair of the posterolateral corner in the multi‐ligament injured knee have been recently reported, favoring reconstruction instead. The same maybe true for MCL injuries, however evidence‐based treatment recommendations are lacking in the current orthopedic literature. The purpose of this study was to perform an evidence‐based systematic review of the operative management (repair and/or reconstruction) of the MCL in the setting of multi‐ligament knee injuries. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane databases for all relevant articles published in English from 1978 to 2008 on the outcomes of surgical management (repair and/or reconstruction) of the MCL in the setting of combined ligament injuries was performed. Inclusion criteria included articles published in (1) English, (2) on human subjects, (3) between the years of 1978 and 2008, (4) had minimum 12‐month follow‐up, with a mean of at least 24 months, (5) on surgical management of MCL injuries, (6) associated with multi‐ligament injuries (three or more ligaments) and/or knee dislocation, and (7) reported objective outcome data on the respective patient cohorts. Exclusion criteria consisted of technique papers, case reports, studies that included fractures associated with MCL injury and those that included pediatric patients. The review identified eight relevant studies. Five articles focused on MCL repair, while three articles focused on MCL reconstruction. No prospective studies compared MCL repair or reconstruction with non‐operative treatment or directly compared MCL reconstruction with MCL repair. Currently there is a paucity of objective data on the outcomes regarding surgical management of MCL tears in the combined ligament injured knee. This systematic review demonstrated satisfactory results in both repair and reconstruction groups. Future objective outcome‐based studies as well as comparative studies are needed to further evaluate the optimal treatment modality before evidence‐based recommendations can be made. Therefore, individual treatment decisions for each patient should be based on the characteristics and nature of the injury.