COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Arthroscopic debridement versus refixation of the acetabular labrum associated with femoroacetabular impingement: mean 3.5-year follow-up

Christopher M Larson, M Russell Giveans, Rebecca M Stone
American Journal of Sports Medicine 2012, 40 (5): 1015-21
22307078

BACKGROUND: The acetabular labrum provides a sealing function and a degree of hip joint stability. Limited, short-term follow-up studies suggest that labral refixation/preservation leads to superior outcomes compared with labral debridement/excision.

PURPOSE: To compare the results of labral refixation versus focal labral excision/debridement in a cohort of patients who underwent arthroscopic correction of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS: We reported on patients who underwent labral debridement/focal labral excision during a period before the development of labral repair techniques. Patients with labral tears thought to be repairable with our current arthroscopic technique were compared with a cohort of patients who underwent labral refixation. To better match the 2 groups, only patients with labral pincer- or combined-type FAI were included. In the first 44 hips, the labrum was focally excised/debrided (group 1); in the next 50 hips, the labrum was refixed (group 2). Outcomes were measured with the modified Harris Hip Score (HHS), Short Form 12 (SF-12), and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain preoperatively and postoperatively. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were obtained to evaluate bony resection.

RESULTS: The mean age was 32 years in group 1 and 28 years in group 2 with a mean follow-up of 42 months (range, 24-72 months). Preoperative mean subjective outcome scores were not significantly different between groups. At a mean 3.5 years' follow-up, subjective outcomes were significantly improved (P < .01) for both groups compared with preoperative scores. The HHS (P = .001), SF-12 (P = .041), and VAS pain scores (P = .004) were all significantly better for the refixation group compared with the debridement group at the most recent follow-up. At a mean 3.5 years' follow-up, good to excellent results were noted in 68% of the focal excision/debridement group and 92% of the refixation group (P = .004).

CONCLUSION: Although other factors may have influenced these results, labral refixation compared with an earlier cohort of focal labral excision/debridement resulted in better HHS, SF-12, and VAS pain outcomes and a greater percentage of good to excellent results at a mean 3.5-year follow-up.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
22307078
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"