Routine Interportal Capsular Repair Does Not Lead to Superior Clinical Outcome Following Arthroscopic Femoroacetabular Impingement Correction With Labral Repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of routine capsular repair on clinical outcome in a consecutive series of patients undergoing arthroscopic correction of symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2015, patients were assigned to 1 of 2 groups based on whether a capsular repair was performed as part of their index hip arthroscopic procedure. Exclusion criteria included previous underlying hip conditions, Tönnis >1, age >45 years, and labrum not repaired. Patients were assessed preoperatively and 2-years postoperatively using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), UCLA activity scale, short form-36, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, and measures of range of hip movements. The incidence of any subsequent revision surgery within 2 years was recorded. Sex and age groups were specifically analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 966 consecutive cases were included (96.4% follow-up rate): 508 in group A (no repair) and 458 in group B (repair). Average age for all cases was 28.1 ± 7.0 years (14.6-44.9). There were significant improvements in all PROMs following surgery for both groups (P < .001). Statistical significance between groups at 2 years was observed for Short Form-36 (P = .001) and WOMAC (P = .041), greater in group A. Both groups similarly met the minimal clinically important difference (mHHS P = .414 and .605; UCLA, P = .549 and .614; Short Form-36, P = .455 and .079; WOMAC, P = .425 and .750 for distribution and anchor-based methods, respectively). In total, 38 (7.8%) cases group A and 24 (5.4%) cases group B required repeat hip arthroscopy (HA) (P = .148); No (0%) cases in group A and 2 (0.45%) cases in group B required total hip replacement (P = .226). There was significantly lower rate of repeat HA among 25- to 34-year age group (8.6% vs 3.9%, P = .047) where capsular repair was performed. No significant difference in the rate of repeat HA between groups for male (P = .203) or female (P = .603) subjects. Adhesions were more common in the repair group (79.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 57.8-92.9 vs 55.3%, CI 38.3-71.4; P = .055), with further capsular repair/plication required more frequently in the unrepaired group (50%, CI 33.4-66.6 vs 25%, CI 10.8-44.3); however, differences between groups were not significant (P = .051). Internal rotation was larger in group A compared with group B at 2 years (36.2 vs 28.1, P = .000). Female patients with capsular repair had reduced PROM scores at 2 years compared with female patients without repair (WOMAC, P = .004, and mHHS, P = .037). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic correction of femoroacetabular impingement with labral repair results in significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes at 2-years postsurgery, irrespective of whether the capsule is repaired. Routine capsular repair in a consecutive series of patients did not lead to superior outcomes compared with a nonrepaired group; similar proportions of cases in both groups were able to achieve minimal clinically important difference. In female patients, routinely repairing the capsule may lead to statistically inferior clinical outcome at 2-years postsurgery, although this may not be clinically significant. Routine capsular repair, however, may be beneficial in the younger, active patient, where a significant reduction in repeat arthroscopy was observed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".