The benefit of arthroscopy of the hip in the
treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in terms of quality
of life (QoL) has not been reported. We prospectively collected
data on 612 patients (257 women (42%) and 355 men (58%)) with a
mean age at the time of surgery of 36.7 years (14 to 75) who underwent
arthroscopy of the hip for FAI under the care of a single surgeon.
The minimum follow-up was one year (mean 3.2 years (1 to 7)). The
responses to the modified Harris hip score were translated using
the Rosser Index Matrix in order to provide a QoL score. The mean
QoL score increased from 0.946 (-1.486 to 0.995) to 0.974 (0.7 to
1) at one year after surgery (p <
0.001). The mean QoL score
in men was significantly higher than in women, both before and one
year after surgery (both p <
0.001). However, the mean change
in the QoL score was not statistically different between men and
women (0.02 (-0.21 to 0.27) and 0.04 (-0.16 to 0.87), respectively;
p = 0.12). Linear regression analysis revealed that the significant predictors
of a change in QoL score were pre-operative QoL score (p <
0.001)
and gender (p = 0.04). The lower the pre-operative score, the higher
the gain in QoL post-operatively (ρ = -0.66; p <
0.001). One
year after surgery the QoL scores in the 612 patients had improved
in 469 (76.6%), remained unchanged in 88 (14.4%) and had deteriorated
in 55 (9.0%).
Femoroacetabular impingement is a well-documented
cause of hip pain. There is, however, increasing evidence for the
presence of a previously unrecognised impingement-type condition
around the hip – ischiofemoral impingement. This is caused by abnormal
contact between the lesser trochanter of the femur and the ischium,
and presents as atypical groin and/or posterior buttock pain. The
symptoms are gradual in onset and may be similar to those of iliopsoas
tendonitis, hamstring injury or bursitis. The presence of ischiofemoral impingement
may be indicated by pain caused by a combination of hip extension, adduction
and external rotation. Magnetic resonance imaging demonstrates inflammation and
oedema in the ischiofemoral space and quadratus femoris, and is
distinct from an acute tear. To date this has only appeared in the
specialist orthopaedic literature as a problem that has developed
after total hip replacement, not in the unreplaced joint.
Arthroscopy of the native hip is an established diagnostic and therapeutic procedure. Its application in the symptomatic replaced hip is still being explored. We describe the use of arthroscopy of the hip in 24 symptomatic patients following total hip replacement, resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip and partial resurfacing (study group), and compared it with arthroscopy of the native hip in 24 patients (control group). A diagnosis was made or confirmed at arthroscopy in 23 of the study group and a therapeutic arthroscopic intervention resulted in relief of symptoms in ten of these. In a further seven patients it led to revision hip replacement. In contrast, arthroscopy in the control group was diagnostic in all 24 patients and the resulting arthroscopic therapeutic intervention provided symptomatic relief in 21. The mean operative time in the study group (59.7 minutes (35 to 93)) was less than in the control group (71 minutes (40 to 100), p = 0.04) but the arthroscopic approach was more difficult in the arthroplasty group. We suggest that arthroscopy has a role in the management of patients with a symptomatic arthroplasty when other investigations have failed to provide a diagnosis.
We review the history and literature of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Resurfacing and the science behind it continues to evolve. Recent results, particularly from the national arthroplasty registers, have spread disquiet among both surgeons and patients. A hip resurfacing arthroplasty is not a total hip replacement, but should perhaps be seen as a means of delaying it. The time when hip resurfacing is offered to a patient may be different from that for a total hip replacement. The same logic can apply to the timing of revision surgery. Consequently, the comparison of resurfacing with total hip replacement may be a false one. Nevertheless, the need for innovative solutions for young arthroplasty patients is clear. Total hip replacement can be usefully delayed in many of these patients by the use of hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
