Pudendal nerve injury is a relatively common but transient complication of hip arthroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Hip arthroscopy is emerging as the standard of care for conditions involving the hip, and has a unique set of complications. The purpose of this review was to identify (1) the crude rate of pudendal nerve injury following hip arthroscopy and (2) the specific factors leading to pudendal nerve injury. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched from database inception to October 2016. Patient demographics, indications, surgical technique, complication rates, treatment approaches, and rehabilitation strategies were extracted. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies (n = 3405) were included, with the majority (66%) of studies being level IV evidence. The mean age was 33.9 ± 9.7 years (range 12-78) and 48.2% were males. Average follow-up was 30.2 ± 19.1 months. 62 patients were reported to have sustained pudendal nerve injury (1.8%) post-operatively, and all resolved within 6 weeks to 3 months. Of the seven studies that reported using a perineal post, 20 patients were diagnosed with pudendal nerve injury (4.3%), in contrast to two studies (189 patients) reporting only 0.5% pudendal nerve injury without the use of perineal post. Two studies commented on time of traction during surgical intervention with mean times of 98 and 68 min with complication rates of 10% and 6.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pudendal nerve injury is not uncommon following hip arthroscopy, with a reported rate found in this review of 1.8%. Potential risk factors may include the use of a perineal post and long traction times. All reported cases resolved within 3 months. Patients should be informed of complications related to pudendal nerve injury, which include sexual and urinary dysfunction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of level I-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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".