SynthesisMedicine2020
Arthroscopic labral debridement versus labral repair for patients with femoroacetabular impingement: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Overview of joint tissue alterations in femoroacetabular impingement: What we know through laboratory analyses.Histology and histopathology · 2026Review
- Hip Labral Reconstruction With a Synthetic Graft: Development and Preclinical Validation.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Reliable enough to guide care? An umbrella review of hip arthroscopy meta-analyses 2020-2025.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Female Patient Representation Is Acceptable in Studies Regarding Hip Arthroscopy With Labral Repair Yet Deficient in Key Study Design and Sport-Specific Features.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Return to Sport Following Arthroscopic Management of Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Comparison of Pain Scores and Functional Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair and Concomitant Capsular Repair or Plication Versus No Closure.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Outcomes of Isolated Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair Compared With Concomitant Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair and Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair: A Propensity-Matched Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Midterm results after arthroscopic femoral neck osteoplasty combined with labral debridement for cam type femoroacetabular impingement in active adults.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Open and arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement: a review of current concepts.Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2022Review
- The role and clinical relevance of the ligamentum teres: long-term outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement.Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2021Article
- The Application of Arthroscopic Techniques in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hip-Related Conditions in China.Orthopaedic surgery · 2021Review
- Complications of hip preserving surgery.EFORT open reviews · 2021Review
- Graft Options in Hip Labral Reconstruction.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2021Review
- Hip microinstability and its association with femoroacetabular impingement: A scoping review.Archives of physiotherapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFemoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a common cause of hip pain and even tearing of the acetabular labrum in young adults and athletes. Either arthroscopic labral debridement (LD) or labral repair (LR) technique for FAI patients is needed to choose. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic LD versus LR intervention.
methodsThe five studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by two of the coauthors independently and were analyzed by RevMan5.3. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess risk of bias.
resultsFour observational studies and one prospective randomized study were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials indicated a low to moderate risk of bias. The pooled results of Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), failure rate of surgeries and complications showed that the differences were not statistically significant between the two interventions. The difference of modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score and satisfaction rate was statistically significant between LD and LR intervention, and LR treatment was more effective. Sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results and there were too less included articles to verify the publication bias.
conclusionsHip arthroscopy with either LR or LD is an effective treatment for symptomatic FAI. The difference of mHHS, VAS score, and satisfaction rate was statistically significant between LD and LR intervention, and arthroscopic LR could re-create suction-seal effect, potentially reduce microinstability, which demonstrated a trend toward better clinical efficacy and comparable safety compared with LD. The arthroscopic LR technique is recommended as the optical choice for acetabular labrum tear with FAI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.