ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2025
Comparative efficacy of hip arthroscopy versus structured non-surgical treatment for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: a mid-term retrospective cohort study.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFemoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is a prevalent cause of hip pain, yet comparative evidence on the clinical efficacy of hip arthroscopic surgery (HAS) versus non-surgical treatment (NST) remains limited. This study evaluated their short- to mid-term outcomes to inform optimal therapeutic strategies for FAIS.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted on 85 patients with FAIS. Fifty-one patients underwent HAS, and 34 received a structured NST program. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) were compared between the two groups at pre-treatment and 1 month, 6 months, and final follow-up (mean 21.73 months).
resultsBoth groups demonstrated significant improvements, with 100% of patients achieving the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) thresholds at the final follow-up. At 1 month follow-up, the NST group showed superior outcomes across all scores compared to the HAS group (P < 0.05). However, this pattern reversed at 6 months and final follow-up, where the HAS group demonstrated significantly better pain and function scores than the NST group (P < 0.05 for VAS, mHHS, NAHS, and HOS-ADL). The interaction analysis confirmed that improvement was greater in the NST group at 1 month follow-up but became greater in the HAS group thereafter.
conclusionsBoth HAS and structured NST are associated with satisfactory clinical outcomes in FAIS patients at mid-term follow-up. The recovery trajectories, however, differed, with NST associated with faster initial improvement and HAS associated with superior outcomes beyond the 6-month time point.
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.