Primary Hip Arthroscopic Surgery With Labral Reconstruction: Is There a Difference Between an Autograft and Allograft?

被引:38
作者
Maldonado, David R. [1 ]
Lall, Ajay C. [1 ]
Laseter, Joseph R. [1 ,2 ]
Kyin, Cynthia [1 ]
Chen, Jeffrey W. [1 ]
Go, Cammille C. [1 ]
Domb, Benjamin G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Amer Hip Inst, 999 East Touhy Ave,Suite 450, Des Plaines, IL 60018 USA
[2] Case Western Reserve Univ, Sch Med, Cleveland, OH USA
关键词
hip arthroscopic surgery; labral reconstruction; hamstring graft; CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION; ACETABULAR LABRUM; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; CHONDRAL LESIONS; REPAIR; RESECTION; TENDON; TISSUE; TEARS; JOINT;
D O I
10.1177/2325967119833715
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Labral reconstruction has been described as a solution for the irreparable labrum. Initial techniques employed autografts, while more recent procedures have utilized allografts. No study, to our knowledge, has compared graft types. Purpose: To compare outcomes between patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction with a hamstring allograft versus hamstring autograft. Hypothesis: No significant differences in outcomes will be found between patients who underwent primary labral reconstruction with an allograft versus autograft. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data from September 2010 to March 2015 were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were primary hip arthroscopic surgery with labral reconstruction using either a hamstring allograft (ALLO group) or autograft (AUTO group), with minimum 2-year follow-up scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip surgery, previous hip conditions, preoperative Tonnis osteoarthritis grade >1, and workers' compensation claims. Significance was set at P = .05. Results: Twenty-nine patients (29 hips) were included (85.3% follow-up). There were 17 patients (17 hips) in the ALLO group and 12 patients (12 hips) in the AUTO group. All patient-reported outcome scores demonstrated significant improvements at latest follow-up except for the mHHS for the AUTO group (P = .064). Comparisons between the ALLO and AUTO groups at the preoperative and latest follow-up time points showed no significant differences (preoperative mean [range]: mHHS, 67.5 [33.0-100.0] and 65.8 [29.0-96.0], respectively [P = .826]; NAHS, 65.6 [26.3-92.5] and 58.5 [35.0-79.0], respectively [P = .322]; HOS-SSS, 43.7 [12.5-100.0] and 40.1 [19.0-78.0], respectively [P = .707]) (latest follow-up mean [range]: mHHS, 86.4 [56.0-100.0] and 81.4 [57.0-100.0], respectively [P = .46]; NAHS, 87.7 [60.0-100.0] and 82.4 [56.3-100.0], respectively [P = .396]; HOS-SSS, 81.7 [0.0-100.0] and 70.9 [27.8-100.0], respectively [P = .423]). Conclusion: Primary arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction yielded improvements in patient-reported outcome scores and high patient satisfaction. In this small series, no differences were found in clinical outcomes between hamstring allografts and autografts. Based on these results, hamstring allografts and autografts may be considered comparable graft choices for primary reconstruction. Because of the avoidance of donor site morbidity and the possible increase in patient satisfaction, allografts may be the preferred choice in a surgical setting when they are accessible.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 41 条
[21]   Hip Arthroscopy Outcomes With Respect to Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State and Minimal Clinically Important Difference [J].
Levy, David M. ;
Kuhns, Benjamin D. ;
Chahal, Jaskarndip ;
Philippon, Marc J. ;
Kelly, Bryan T. ;
Nho, Shane J. .
ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2016, 32 (09) :1877-1886
[22]   Arthroscopic Hip Labral Reconstruction With a Gracilis Autograft Versus Labral Refixation 2-Year Minimum Outcomes [J].
Matsuda, Dean K. ;
Burchette, Raoul J. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2013, 41 (05) :980-987
[23]   Survivorship and Outcomes 10 Years Following Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement [J].
Menge, Travis J. ;
Briggs, Karen K. ;
Dornan, Grant J. ;
McNamara, Shannen C. ;
Philippon, Marc J. .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2017, 99 (12) :997-1004
[24]   Reconstruction of Massive Posterior Nonrepairable Acetabular Labral Tears With Peroneus Brevis Tendon Allograft: Arthroscopy-Assisted Mini-Open Approach [J].
Moya, Esther ;
Gerardo Natera, Luis ;
Cardenas, Carlomagno ;
Astarita, Emanuele ;
Bellotti, Vittorio ;
Ribas, Manel .
ARTHROSCOPY TECHNIQUES, 2016, 5 (05) :E1015-E1022
[25]   Labral reconstruction with tendon allograft: histological findings show revascularization at 8 weeks from implantation [J].
Moya Gomez, Esther ;
Cardenas, Carlomagno ;
Astarita, Emmanuelle ;
Bellotti, Vittorio ;
Tresserra, Francesc ;
Gerardo Natera, Luis ;
Ribas, Manel .
JOURNAL OF HIP PRESERVATION SURGERY, 2017, 4 (01) :74-79
[26]   The hip fluid seal-Part II: The effect of an acetabular labral tear, repair, resection, and reconstruction on hip stability to distraction [J].
Nepple, Jeffrey J. ;
Philippon, Marc J. ;
Campbell, Kevin J. ;
Dornan, Grant J. ;
Jansson, Kyle S. ;
LaPrade, Robert F. ;
Wijdicks, Coen A. .
KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2014, 22 (04) :730-736
[27]   Editorial: Hip Arthroscopy [J].
Nho, Shane J. ;
Ukwuani, Gift ;
Harris, Joshua D. .
FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2017, 4
[28]   Use of the Quadriceps Tendon in Arthroscopic Acetabular Labral Reconstruction: Potential and Benefits as an Autograft Option [J].
Park, Sang Eun ;
Ko, Yujin .
ARTHROSCOPY TECHNIQUES, 2013, 2 (03) :E217-E219
[29]  
Perets I, 2017, ARTHROSC TEC, V6, pE695, DOI 10.1016/j.eats.2017.01.014
[30]   Patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) [J].
Pham, Thao ;
Tubach, Florence .
JOINT BONE SPINE, 2009, 76 (04) :321-323