Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39534025›Full record

ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2024

The Definition of Failure in Hip Arthroscopy May Include Factors Outside of Reoperation: A Systematic Review.

Christopher D Bernard, Eva Bowles, Marcus Trotter, Levi Aldag, Erik Henkelman, Rachel Long, Paul Schroeppel, Scott Mullen, Jacob White, Armin Tarakemeh and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Christopher D BernardDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Eva BowlesDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Marcus TrotterDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Levi AldagDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Erik HenkelmanDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Rachel LongDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Paul SchroeppelDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Scott MullenDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Jacob WhiteDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Armin TarakemehDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Bryan VopatDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To perform a systematic review about the varying definitions of "failure" of hip arthroscopy (HA) in the current literature and to provide a recommendation for the standardization of defining failure of HA. Methods: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identity Level I-IV clinical studies on HA failure published between January 2016 and July 2021 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies of patients who underwent an arthroscopic hip procedure and included a definition of failure. Studies with patients who underwent open hip procedures and non-full-text articles were excluded. Results: Of 1,290 titles, 85 (6.6%) met inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this review. The most common definition of HA failure used was the need for any subsequent ipsilateral hip surgery (80/85, 94.1%). Among studies that noted reoperation as a cause for failure, conversion to total hip arthroplasty was most frequently cited (66/85, 77.6%) followed by any other reoperation on the ipsilateral hip, including repeat HA, hip resurfacing, and hip periacetabular osteotomy (65/85, 76.5%). Multiple studies used subjective patient-reported outcomes, with use of the modified Harris Hip Score being the most common (17/85, 20%). Conclusions: There are numerous definitions of the term "failure" of HA used by authors in the peer-reviewed literature. A standardized definition of HA failure should be multifactorial. It may include any unplanned subsequent procedures; patient-reported outcomes with emphasis on minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and/or patient acceptable symptom state values; and the inability to return to normal function or sports. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Identifiers

PMID39534025
PMCPMC11551386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.