Indications and Outcomes of Secondary Hip Procedures After Failed Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review
Authors
Shapira J, Kyin C, Go C, Rosinsky PJ, Maldonado DR, Lall AC, Domb BG
DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.02.028
Background
This study reviews the outcomes of secondary procedures (such as revision arthroscopy, periacetabular osteotomy [PAO], or total hip arthroplasty [THA]) in patients whose initial hip arthroscopy failed. It examines the reasons for these secondary surgeries and the resulting patient-reported outcomes (PROs).
Methods
The review included 18 studies on patients who had secondary surgeries after failed hip arthroscopy. Common procedures included revision hip arthroscopy, PAO, and THA. The authors compared these secondary groups to primary surgery groups and evaluated PROs and surgical success.
Key Findings
Patients who underwent revision hip arthroscopy had generally good outcomes but reported slightly worse results compared to those who had primary arthroscopy. The outcomes for patients undergoing secondary PAO or THA were variable, with some showing no difference in results compared to primary surgeries.
Conclusions
Secondary procedures for hip issues after failed arthroscopy can be effective but may not provide the same level of improvement as primary surgeries. The type of secondary procedure (revision arthroscopy, PAO, or THA) impacts outcomes.
What Does This Mean for Patients
If you’ve had hip arthroscopy but continue to have issues, a secondary surgery may help. However, it’s important to understand that these procedures may not provide the same results as the first surgery, and there could be more complications or less improvement.