Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 22, 2025
Author Spotlight: Double Posteromedial Approach for Treating Posterior Cruciate Ligament Cysts
Published on: October 20, 2023
Hip Arthroscopy in Patients Aged 40 Years and Older: Greater Success With Labral Reconstruction Compared With Labral
Brian J White1, Julie Patterson2, Alexandra M Scoles3
1Western Orthopaedics, Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.; Center for Hip Preservation, Porter Adventist Hospital, Denver, Colorado, U.S.A..
Purpose:
To assess the outcomes of complete, primary, arthroscopic hip labral reconstruction among patients aged 40 years and older compared with those who underwent primary labral repair and compared with patients aged 30 to 39 years who underwent complete, primary labral reconstruction.
Methods:
We recruited all patients who underwent arthroscopic labral reconstruction between March 2010 and June 2015 and were aged 30 to 65 years or who underwent arthroscopic labral repair between June 2009 and June 2015 and were aged 40 to 65 years. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Lower Extremity Function Score, and visual analog scale score for average pain were collected preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up. Failure was defined as the need for revision ipsilateral hip surgery. The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (a subset of failure) was assessed separately.
Results:
A total of 363 hips in 343 patients met the inclusion criteria. Follow-up was available for 312 hips (86.0%), and the average time to follow-up was 4.2 years (range, 2.0-8.5 years). After adjustment for differences in follow-up time between groups, failure was 3.29 times more likely for hips in the repair group aged 40 years and older than for hips in the reconstruction group aged 40 years and older (relative rate, 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-8.69; P = .02), and there was no difference in the failure rate for hips in the reconstruction group aged 40 years and older compared with hips in the reconstruction group aged 30 to 39 years (relative rate, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-1.89; P = .37). The rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty was not meaningfully different between the 3 groups. Among hips for which treatment did not fail, average improvement in the mHHS measured 35 points and both labral reconstruction groups saw a greater mHHS improvement than the labral repair group of patients aged 40 years and older (P = .01 and P < .01).
Conclusions:
Labral reconstruction led to a lower failure rate, greater average improvement in the mHHS, and equivalent postoperative patient-reported outcome scores compared with labral repair among patients aged 40 years and older in this study population, and the outcomes of labral reconstruction were similar between patients aged 40 years and older and those aged 30 to 39 years. Complete labral reconstruction may be particularly advantageous in patients aged 40 years and older.
Level Of Evidence:
Level III, retrospective comparative study.
