The Definition of Failure in Hip Arthroscopy May Include Factors Outside of Reoperation: A Systematic Review

Q3 Medicine
{"title":"The Definition of Failure in Hip Arthroscopy May Include Factors Outside of Reoperation: A Systematic Review","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To perform a systematic review about the varying definitions of “failure” of hip arthroscopy (HA) in the current literature and to provide a recommendation for the standardization of defining failure of HA.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identity Level I-IV clinical studies on HA failure published between January 2016 and July 2021 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies of patients who underwent an arthroscopic hip procedure and included a definition of failure. Studies with patients who underwent open hip procedures and non–full-text articles were excluded.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 1,290 titles, 85 (6.6%) met inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this review. The most common definition of HA failure used was the need for any subsequent ipsilateral hip surgery (80/85, 94.1%). Among studies that noted reoperation as a cause for failure, conversion to total hip arthroplasty was most frequently cited (66/85, 77.6%) followed by any other reoperation on the ipsilateral hip, including repeat HA, hip resurfacing, and hip periacetabular osteotomy (65/85, 76.5%). Multiple studies used subjective patient-reported outcomes, with use of the modified Harris Hip Score being the most common (17/85, 20%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>There are numerous definitions of the term “failure” of HA used by authors in the peer-reviewed literature. A standardized definition of HA failure should be multifactorial. It may include any unplanned subsequent procedures; patient-reported outcomes with emphasis on minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and/or patient acceptable symptom state values; and the inability to return to normal function or sports.</div></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><div>Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34631,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000890","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To perform a systematic review about the varying definitions of “failure” of hip arthroscopy (HA) in the current literature and to provide a recommendation for the standardization of defining failure of HA.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identity Level I-IV clinical studies on HA failure published between January 2016 and July 2021 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies of patients who underwent an arthroscopic hip procedure and included a definition of failure. Studies with patients who underwent open hip procedures and non–full-text articles were excluded.

Results

Of 1,290 titles, 85 (6.6%) met inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this review. The most common definition of HA failure used was the need for any subsequent ipsilateral hip surgery (80/85, 94.1%). Among studies that noted reoperation as a cause for failure, conversion to total hip arthroplasty was most frequently cited (66/85, 77.6%) followed by any other reoperation on the ipsilateral hip, including repeat HA, hip resurfacing, and hip periacetabular osteotomy (65/85, 76.5%). Multiple studies used subjective patient-reported outcomes, with use of the modified Harris Hip Score being the most common (17/85, 20%).

Conclusions

There are numerous definitions of the term “failure” of HA used by authors in the peer-reviewed literature. A standardized definition of HA failure should be multifactorial. It may include any unplanned subsequent procedures; patient-reported outcomes with emphasis on minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and/or patient acceptable symptom state values; and the inability to return to normal function or sports.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.
髋关节镜手术失败的定义可能包括再手术以外的因素:系统回顾
目的 对现有文献中关于髋关节镜手术(HA)"失败 "的不同定义进行系统综述,并为HA失败定义的标准化提供建议。方法 根据《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目》指南,对电子数据库进行系统检索,以识别2016年1月至2021年7月间发表的关于HA失败的I-IV级临床研究。纳入标准包括对接受关节镜髋关节手术的患者进行的研究,并包含失败的定义。结果 在1290篇文章中,有85篇(6.6%)符合纳入标准,并在本综述中进行了分析。HA失败最常见的定义是需要随后进行同侧髋关节手术(80/85,94.1%)。在将再次手术作为失败原因的研究中,最常提到的是转为全髋关节置换术(66/85,77.6%),其次是同侧髋关节的任何其他再次手术,包括重复HA、髋关节置换和髋关节胫骨周围截骨术(65/85,76.5%)。多项研究使用了患者主观报告的结果,其中使用改良的 Harris 髋关节评分最为常见(17/85,20%)。HA失败的标准化定义应该是多因素的。它可能包括任何计划外的后续手术;患者报告的结果,重点是最小临床重要性差异、实质性临床获益和/或患者可接受的症状状态值;以及无法恢复正常功能或运动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
218
审稿时长
45 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信