There has been a marked increase in the number of hip arthroscopies performed over the past 16 years, primarily in the management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Insights into the pathoanatomy of FAI, and high-level evidence supporting the clinical effectiveness of arthroscopy in the management of FAI, have fuelled this trend. Arthroscopic management of labral tears with repair may have superior results compared with debridement, and there is now emerging evidence to support reconstructive options where repair is not possible. In situations where an interportal capsulotomy is performed to facilitate access, data now support closure of the capsule in selective cases where there is an increased risk of postoperative instability. Preoperative planning is an integral component of bony corrective surgery in FAI, and this has evolved to include computer-planned resection. However, the benefit of this remains controversial. Hip instability is now widely accepted, and diagnostic criteria and treatment are becoming increasingly refined. Instability can also be present with FAI or develop as a result of FAI treatment. In this annotation, we outline major current controversies relating to decision-making in hip arthroscopy for FAI.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):532–540.

Stable fractures of the ankle can be safely treated non-operatively. It is also gradually being recognised that the integrity of the ‘medial column’ is essential for the stability of the fracture. It is generally thought that bi- and tri-malleolar fractures are unstable, as are pronation external rotation injuries resulting in an isolated high fibular fracture (Weber type-C), where the deltoid ligament is damaged or the medial malleolus fractured. However, how best to identify unstable, isolated, trans-syndesmotic Weber type-B supination external rotation (SER) fractures of the lateral malleolus remains controversial.

We provide a rationale as to how to classify SER distal fibular fractures using weight-bearing radiographs, and how this can help guide the management of these common injuries.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:851–5.

There is a trend towards the use of double-bundle techniques for the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. This has not been substantiated scientifically. The functional outcome of these techniques is equivalent to that of single-bundle methods. The main advantage of a double-bundle rather than a single-bundle reconstruction should be a better rotational stability, but the validity and accuracy of systems for the measurement of rotational stability have not been confirmed.

Despite the enthusiasm of surgeons for the double-bundle technique, reconstruction with a single-bundle should remain the standard method for managing deficiency of the anterior cruciate ligament until strong evidence in favour of the use of the double-bundle method is available.