ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2021
Radiographic Factors Associated With Failure of Revision Hip Arthroscopy.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Outcomes of Primary Versus Revision Hip Arthroscopic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.The American journal of sports medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Preoperative versus postoperative nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in femoroacetabular impingement patients undergoing hip arthroscopy surgery: analgesic effect, joint function, patients' satisfaction, and quality of life.Inflammopharmacology · 2024Observational
- The Definition of Failure in Hip Arthroscopy May Include Factors Outside of Reoperation: A Systematic Review.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify clinical and radiographic factors associated with failure of revision hip arthroscopy (RHA).
methodsA database was used to identify patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy and revision hip arthroscopy (RHA) from January 2007 to December 2017 for the indication of femoroacetabular impingement and failure of the index procedure, respectively. The primary outcome was defined as the change, or difference, in the preoperative to postoperative alpha angle between patients with successful RHA and those with failed RHA. Failure was defined as reoperation on the operative hip for any indication or a modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) of less than 70 at the 1-year postoperative time point. All patients had a minimum of 2 years' follow-up from the date of revision hip surgery. Patients with a history of revision were divided into those with failed revisions and those with successful revisions. The inclusion criteria for failed revision included a history of subsequent revision surgery (or arthroplasty) or an mHHS of less than 70 at final follow-up.
resultsThe study included 26 patients, comprising 8 (31%) with failed RHA and 18 (69%) with successful revision. The failure group showed a significantly smaller decrease in the alpha angle with surgery, measured on the Dunn view, compared with the success group. When the preoperative alpha angle was held constant, each 1° increase in the difference between the preoperative and postoperative alpha angles achieved during surgery was associated with a 17% decrease in the odds of failure. Patients included in the success group had both a higher preoperative mHHS (44.2 ± 8.6 vs 34.7 ± 9.6) and a higher postoperative mHHS (83.2 ± 8.3 vs 62.3 ± 14.2) than patients with failed RHA. There was a statistically significant difference in the frequency of patients who achieved the patient acceptable symptomatic state of +74.0 between the failure (25%) and success (83%) groups; 88% of patients in the failure group met the minimal clinically important difference, whereas 100% of patients in the success group (n = 18) met it.
conclusionsComplete resection of cam lesions as determined by changes in the alpha angle, anterior offset, and head-neck ratio when measured on the Dunn 45° view correlates with positive clinical outcomes after RHA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Retrospective Comparative Study.
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.