Abstract:Background: Compromise of the acetabular labrum can lead to pain and loss of critical intra-articular fluid pressure. Revision labral preservation poses unique challenges due to adhesions and compromised tissue quality. Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose of the study was to evaluate patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy with either labral reconstruction or labral repair after primary hip arthroscopy for labral tear. It was hypothesized that both procedures would lead to improved PROs. Study design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted with the following keywords: (revision) AND (hip OR femoroacetabular impingement) AND (arthroscop*) AND (reconstruction OR repair) in PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus in August 2023 using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) criteria, yielding 2002 initial records. Only studies comparing PROMs between revision labral reconstruction or revision labral repair after primary hip arthroscopy for labral tear were included. Background article information was recorded, including article title, author, study design, level of evidence, patient demographics, radiographic information, intraoperative data, PROMs, psychometric thresholds, and secondary surgeries. Secondary surgery in our study was defined as any open or arthroscopic hip surgery secondary to the initial revision surgery. Forest plots were created for pre- and postoperative outcomes present in ≥3 studies. Heterogeneity was calculated using I 2 values. Results: Four studies, including 215 revision labral reconstructions and 115 revision labral repairs of the hips, were included in this systematic review. All studies were level 3 evidence, and study periods ranged between 2009 and 2019. Mean follow-up for the reconstruction and repair groups ranged from 26.3 to 36.6 months and 30.7 to 56.4 months, respectively. The mean age for the reconstruction and repair groups varied between 27 to 34.6 years and 27.5 to 30 years, respectively. Mean postoperative modified Harris Hip Scores for the reconstruction and repair cohorts ranged from 72.0 to 81.2 and 70.8 to 84.1, respectively (I 2 = 0%). Mean visual analog scale for pain scores for the reconstruction and repair cohorts ranged from 3 to 3.5 and 2.3 to 3.9 (I 2 = 33%). Overall secondary surgery rates ranged from 10.0% to 26.7% in the labral reconstruction cohort, compared with 10.0% to 50.0% in the labral repair cohort. One study reported superior outcomes in the revision labral repair group, with 3 studies finding no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the groups. Conclusion: Our systematic review showed that patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy with labral reconstruction demonstrated significant improvement in postoperative outcome measures. Postoperative outcomes were similar to those of a benchmark control group of patients undergoing revision hip arthroscopy and labral repair. Labral reconstruction in the revision setting appears to be an effective treatment in clinically indicated patients.

Periprocedural clinical outcomes of revision hip arthroplasty: a multi-centric comparison of current strategies based on the NSQIP

Evaluation of Causes and Clinical Effects of Revision Surgery after Artificial Hip Replacement

Clinical Analysis and Prevention for Revision of Artificial Hip Joint Replacement

Clinical Outcomes and Causes of Arthroscopic Hip Revision Surgery

Surgical Treatments for Vancouver Type B1 Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures

Patients Undergoing Revision Hip Arthroscopy With Labral Reconstruction or Labral Repair and Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Revision total hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic fracture: epidemiology, outcomes, and factors associated with success

Early Rate of Revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty Related to Surgical Approach: An Analysis of 122,345 Primary Total Hip Arthroplasties

Periprosthetic femoral fractures in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA): a comparison between osteosynthesis and revision in a retrospective cohort study

Management of Acetabular Bone Loss in Hip Revision Arthroplasty: Case Series Presentation

Revision Rate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Post Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty of 34 Hospitals in China Between 2015 and 2017: a Multi-Center Survey

Performing Revision Arthroplasty Increases Surgeon and Practice Volumes Through the Generation of Subsequent Cases: A Retrospective Study

Treatment strategy and clinical outcomes of surgically managed hip periprosthetic fractures: analysis from a high-volume centre

Comparing outcomes in revision total hip arthroplasty in inpatient versus outpatient setting: a matched cohort analysis

The Effect of Surgical Approach and Femoral Prosthesis Type on Revision Rates Following Total Hip Arthroplasty

Revision Surgery in Total Joint Replacement Is Cost-Intensive

Direct Costs Vary by Outcome in Two-Stage Revision Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Hip Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Evaluation and Management of Acetabular Bone Loss in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A 10-year Update

Fixation or Revision for Periprosthetic Fractures: Epidemiology, New Trends, and Projections in the United States

Complications and Revisions in Metal-Backed Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Comparative Study of Revision Rates Between Stemless and Stemmed Humeral Components

Revisions of Total Hip Prostheses: About 03 Cases and Review of the Literature