We have located links that may give you full text access.
Are Short-term Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy in Patients 55 Years and Older Inferior to Those in Younger Patients?
American Journal of Sports Medicine 2016 October
BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy for young patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has been successful, but the efficacy of hip arthroscopy in older patients is not clearly defined.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients 55 years and older who are undergoing hip arthroscopy and to compare outcomes with those of patients younger than 55 years.
STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS: A total of 201 (63 male, 138 female) patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAI without radiographic arthritis (Tönnis grade <3) were isolated from a prospective database and stratified by age to <55-year and ≥55-year groups. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS: functional scores, as well as Activities of Daily Living [ADL] and Sport subscales). A Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was used to evaluate the differences in outcome scores between the cohorts at each interval.
RESULTS: The <55-year group included 174 patients (mean age, 37 ± 12 years), and the ≥55-year group included 27 patients (mean age, 61 ± 5 years). The minimum follow-up time was 2 years in each group. Preoperative Tönnis grades and mHHS scores (59 vs 59; P = .75) were similar between groups. The ≥55-year cohort underwent labral debridement more frequently (78% vs 36%; P =.02) and were more likely to have full-thickness cartilage defects (22% vs 4%; P = .04). Despite this, the mHHS in both groups improved significantly from baseline, without significant differences at 1 year (86 [≥55 years] vs 81 [<55 years]; P = .53) or 2 years (73.88 [≥55 years] vs 79.54 [<55 years]; P = .06). However, at a minimum 2-year follow-up, patients <55 years had significant improvements over patients ≥55 years in the HOS subscales for ADL score (85.6 vs 75.2; P = .03), ADL rating (80.1 vs 70.0; P = .004), Sport score (70.2 vs 55.6; P = .04), and Sport rating (70.2 vs 58.0; P = .04).
CONCLUSION: Although younger patients had superior HOS outcomes reported at 2 years compared with older patients after hip arthroscopy for FAI, both groups had significant improvement compared with their baseline. These data suggest that carefully selected patients 55 years and older without radiographic arthritis may benefit from hip arthroscopy.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients 55 years and older who are undergoing hip arthroscopy and to compare outcomes with those of patients younger than 55 years.
STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS: A total of 201 (63 male, 138 female) patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAI without radiographic arthritis (Tönnis grade <3) were isolated from a prospective database and stratified by age to <55-year and ≥55-year groups. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS: functional scores, as well as Activities of Daily Living [ADL] and Sport subscales). A Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was used to evaluate the differences in outcome scores between the cohorts at each interval.
RESULTS: The <55-year group included 174 patients (mean age, 37 ± 12 years), and the ≥55-year group included 27 patients (mean age, 61 ± 5 years). The minimum follow-up time was 2 years in each group. Preoperative Tönnis grades and mHHS scores (59 vs 59; P = .75) were similar between groups. The ≥55-year cohort underwent labral debridement more frequently (78% vs 36%; P =.02) and were more likely to have full-thickness cartilage defects (22% vs 4%; P = .04). Despite this, the mHHS in both groups improved significantly from baseline, without significant differences at 1 year (86 [≥55 years] vs 81 [<55 years]; P = .53) or 2 years (73.88 [≥55 years] vs 79.54 [<55 years]; P = .06). However, at a minimum 2-year follow-up, patients <55 years had significant improvements over patients ≥55 years in the HOS subscales for ADL score (85.6 vs 75.2; P = .03), ADL rating (80.1 vs 70.0; P = .004), Sport score (70.2 vs 55.6; P = .04), and Sport rating (70.2 vs 58.0; P = .04).
CONCLUSION: Although younger patients had superior HOS outcomes reported at 2 years compared with older patients after hip arthroscopy for FAI, both groups had significant improvement compared with their baseline. These data suggest that carefully selected patients 55 years and older without radiographic arthritis may benefit from hip arthroscopy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app