ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2024
Characterizations of Capsule Closure in Hip Arthroscopy Are Infrequently and Incompletely Reported: A Systematic Review.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- V-shaped capsular plication for treating cam-type femoroacetabular impingement with hip instability in borderline dysplastic hips: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Arthroscopic T-Capsulotomy With Capsular Traction and Double-Pulley Circumferential Reinforcement for Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Biomechanically Optimized Closure Technique.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Repair of a Proximal Hip Capsular Avulsion in Revision Hip Arthroscopy.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To review the recent literature to provide an updated characterization of capsule closure techniques in hip arthroscopy and to determine if the characteristics of closure impacted clinical outcomes. Methods: In keeping with the Preferred Reporting in Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review was performed with the following eligibility criteria: patients over 18 years of age who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with reporting of patient reported outcome measures or revision/failure, and a sufficiently detailed description of capsule closure. The GRADE framework evaluated study quality, and ROBINS-I evaluated the risk of bias. Results: Across 18 studies (N = 3277) an interportal capsulotomy was reported in 12 studies (1972/3277) cases, and a T-type capsulotomy was reported in six studies (1305/3277) cases). Six studies reported using #2 suture. Nonabsorbable suture was reported in six studies, and absorbable suture in six studies. The rate of failure was 10.5% across five studies (N = 1133) and the rate of revision was 4.4% across 13 studies (N = 2957). Conclusions: Capsule closure is commonly performed with #2 high strength suture-the T-type using two to three sutures in the vertical limb and two to three in the transverse limb, and the interportal type using two to three sutures. Compared to earlier reports, there is a trend for increased utilization of T-type capsulotomy. Although there is a growing body of investigations into the efficacy of routine capsule closure following hip arthroscopy, our results demonstrate infrequent and inconsistent reporting of capsule closure characteristics. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.
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.