American Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
American Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.; AMITA Health St. Alexius Medical Center, Hoffman Estates, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.; Cedars-Sinai Kerlan-Jobe Institute, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2021 Sep;37(9):2975-2990. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.03.063. Epub 2021 Apr 19.
To review the existing literature in order to determine the effect of hip capsule repair on outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.
This study used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to find articles by using PubMed and Embase. Included studies were Level I through III studies that focused on patient outcomes as a function of hip capsular treatments: capsulotomy repair, partial repair, plication, and unrepaired capsulotomies. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies was used for quality assessment of clinical outcome studies. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 16 comparative outcome studies evaluating 2,996 hips were included; they evaluated the following capsular management techniques: complete repair (n = 1,112, 37.1%), partial repair (n = 32, 1.1%), plication (n = 223, 7.4%), and unrepaired capsulotomy (n = 1629, 54.4%).
Of the 16 studies, 13 included patient-reported outcome scores (PROs), 3 included imaging outcomes data, and 2 reported on reoperation. Of the studies, 10 directly compared patient-reported outcomes between a capsular repair group and an unrepaired group. Of the 10 studies that directly compared PROs between a group with unrepaired capsulotomy and a group with capsular repair, 8 studies demonstrated statistically significantly better PROs in the repaired group compared to the unrepaired group, and 2 studies found no difference between the groups. Reoperation rates demonstrated mixed results between groups, and no difference was found in regard to imaging outcomes.
Midterm outcome studies suggest that capsular repair is safe and effective in patients without arthritis who are undergoing hip arthroscopy, and it may result in superior PROs compared with those found after unrepaired capsulotomy. Studies consistently demonstrate similar or superior outcomes in cohorts after capsular repair compared to unrepaired capsulotomy, and no studies reported superior results in unrepaired capsulotomy patients.
Level IV, systematic review of Level I through Level III studies.
回顾现有文献,以确定髋关节镜治疗股骨髋臼撞击综合征后修复髋关节囊对结果的影响。
本研究使用系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目,通过 PubMed 和 Embase 查找文章。纳入的研究为 I 级至 III 级研究,重点关注髋关节囊治疗(囊切开修复、部分修复、折叠和未修复的囊切开术)作为患者结局的功能。非随机研究方法学指数用于临床结局研究的质量评估。在应用纳入和排除标准后,共纳入了 16 项比较结局研究,共评估了 2996 髋,这些研究评估了以下囊管理技术:完全修复(n=1112,37.1%)、部分修复(n=32,1.1%)、折叠(n=223,7.4%)和未修复的囊切开术(n=1629,54.4%)。
在 16 项研究中,有 13 项研究包括患者报告的结局评分(PROs),3 项研究包括影像学结果数据,2 项研究报告了再次手术。在这些研究中,有 10 项研究直接比较了囊修复组和未修复组的患者报告结局。在 10 项直接比较未修复囊切开术组和囊修复组 PROs 的研究中,有 8 项研究表明修复组的 PROs 明显优于未修复组,有 2 项研究发现两组之间无差异。再手术率在各组之间显示出混合结果,在影像学结果方面没有差异。
中期结局研究表明,对于没有关节炎的髋关节镜手术患者,囊修复是安全有效的,与未修复的囊切开术相比,它可能导致更好的 PROs。研究一致表明,在囊修复组与未修复的囊切开术组中,在队列中获得的结果相似或更好,没有研究报告在未修复的囊切开术患者中获得更好的结果。
IV 级,对 I 级至 III 级研究的系统评价。