Accelerated Bilateral Hip Arthroscopy (1 Week Apart): Outcomes Compared With Delayed Bilateral Procedure (4-12 Weeks) and Case-Control Matched Unilateral Arthroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Staged bilateral hip arthroscopy is an option for athletes who have symptomatic bilateral femoroacetabular impingement; however, the optimal timing of the second procedure is unknown. PURPOSE: To evaluate minimum 2-year outcomes for patients undergoing accelerated bilateral arthroscopy against those undergoing (1) delayed bilateral and (2) unilateral arthroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of prospectively collected data from patients undergoing bilateral primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement between 2009 and 2022. Inclusion criteria entailed competitive athletes with concurrent bilateral symptoms at initial presentation. Exclusion criteria (either hip) were Tönnis grade >1, dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle <25°), Perthes disease, protrusio acetabuli, and avascular necrosis. Two groups were established based on the duration between procedures: within 7 days (accelerated group) and within 4 to 12 weeks (delayed group). Patients from the accelerated group were matched in a 1:2 ratio with patients undergoing unilateral surgery based on age ±2 years, sex, and athletic status. Minimum 2-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (including modified Harris Hip Score, University of California Los Angeles activity scale, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference, rates of continuing to play main sport, and satisfaction were compared between groups. RESULTS: = .903). There were no increased complications associated with the accelerated group. CONCLUSION: Accelerated bilateral hip arthroscopy 1 week apart was a safe and effective treatment option for athletes with bilateral symptoms. Improvement in PROs and continue-to-play rates were comparable with those after a delayed duration between procedures and with those case-control matched athletes undergoing unilateral arthroscopy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".