Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Capsular Repair Versus No Repair After Hip Arthroscopy in Patients Without Dysplasia or Generalized Ligamentous Laxity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Capsular Repair Versus No Repair After Hip Arthroscopy in Patients Without Dysplasia or Generalized Ligamentous Laxity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Capsular Repair Versus No Repair After Hip Arthroscopy in Patients Without Dysplasia or Generalized Ligamentous Laxity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Capsular Repair Versus No Repair After Hip Arthroscopy in Patients Without Dysplasia or Generalized Ligamentous Laxity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
2024
Overview
Background:
Many recent studies have shown that patients who undergo capsular repair after hip arthroscopy achieve superior clinical outcomes compared with those who do not. However, patients with dysplasia or generalized ligamentous laxity (GLL) were not excluded from most of these studies, which may have affected the outcomes.
Purpose:
To determine whether capsular repair influences the outcomes of hip arthroscopy for patients without dysplasia or GLL.
Study Design:
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.
Methods:
Under the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of capsulotomy with versus without repair were included, but studies that included patients with dysplasia or GLL were excluded. The study outcomes were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 6 months and 2 years postoperatively—including the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS)— and were compared between the repair and no-repair groups. A narrative analysis and meta-analysis were performed to integrate and compare the results of the 2 groups. In the meta-analysis of the outcome measures, studies with significant differences in the preoperative scores between the repair and no-repair groups were excluded because previous studies have shown that these can affect the outcomes.
Results:
A total of 761 studies were initially identified, of which 3 were included. Of the 322 included patients, 136 underwent capsular repair, and 186 underwent capsulotomy with no repair. The meta-analysis showed that capsular repair was associated with significantly higher postoperative PROMs: the mHHS at 2 years (P = .03), the HOS-ADL at 6 months (P = .02) and 2 years (P < .0001), and the HOS-SSS at 6 months (P = .02) and 2 years (P = .001).
Conclusion:
Capsular repair after hip arthroscopy was associated with superior clinical outcomes when compared with no capsular repair in patients without dysplasia or GLL.
Publisher
SAGE Publications,Sage Publications Ltd
