Arthroscopy Up to Date: Hip Femoroacetabular Impingement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To provide a comprehensive review and summary of the research published in Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery and The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM) related to hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). METHODS: A comprehensive review was conducted in duplicate of Arthroscopy and AJSM from February 2012 to February 2015 for all articles related to FAI, and a quality assessment was completed for all included studies. Clinical outcomes were dichotomized into short-term (<6 months) and midterm (<24 months) outcomes, and values were pooled when possible. RESULTS: We identified 60 studies in Arthroscopy and 44 studies in AJSM, primarily from North America (78.8%), that predominantly assessed clinical outcomes after arthroscopic hip surgery (46.1%). Seventy-one percent of Arthroscopy studies and 20.5% of AJSM studies were Level IV evidence. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) was used by 81.5% of included studies. Pooled weighted mean mHHS values after arthroscopic surgery for FAI showed improvements at the midterm from 60.5 points (range, 56.6 to 83.6 points) to 80.5 points (range, 72.1 to 98.0 points) out of a possible 100 points. Pooled weighted outcomes for labral repair showed mean mHHS improvements from 63.8 points (range, 62.5 to 69.0 points) preoperatively to 86.9 points (range, 85.5 to 89.9 points) up to 24 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive review of research published in Arthroscopy and AJSM over the past 3 years identified a number of key findings. Arthroscopic intervention results in improvements in functional outcomes at both the short-term and midterm for patients with symptomatic FAI in the absence of significant existing degenerative changes. Labral repair may result in improvements over labral debridement. The most commonly used outcome score was the mHHS for objective assessment of surgical success. There is a need for continued focus on improvement of methodologic quality and reporting of research pertaining to FAI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".