Prospective analysis of hip arthroscopy with 2-year follow-up

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 578-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.W.Thomas Byrd ◽  
Kay S. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Prospective Analysis

scholarly journals Joint preservation after hip arthroscopy in patients with FAI. Prospective analysis with a minimum follow-up of seven years

2019 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. 317 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Comba ◽  
C. Yacuzzi ◽  
P.J. Ali ◽  
G. Zanotti ◽  
M. Buttaro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Prospective Analysis ◽  
Joint Preservation

scholarly journals Predictors of Clinical Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy: A Prospective Analysis of 1038 Patients With Two-Year Follow-Up

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. e14-e15
Author(s):  
Parth Lodhia ◽  
Benjamin Domb ◽  
Timothy Martin ◽  
Chengcheng Gui ◽  
Sivashankar Chandrasekaran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Prospective Analysis

Capsular closure versus unrepaired interportal capsulotomy after hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement, results of a patient-blinded randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002110057
Author(s):  
Niels H Bech ◽  
Inger N Sierevelt ◽  
Sheryl de Waard ◽  
Boudijn S H Joling ◽  
Gino M M J Kerkhoffs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background: Hip capsular management after hip arthroscopy remains a topic of debate. Most available current literature is of poor quality and are retrospective or cohort studies. As of today, no clear consensus exists on capsular management after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of routine capsular closure versus unrepaired capsulotomy after interportal capsulotomy measured with NRS pain and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS). Materials and methods: All eligible patients with femoroacetabular impingement who opt for hip arthroscopy ( n = 116) were randomly assigned to one of both treatment groups and were operated by a single surgeon. Postoperative pain was measured with the NRS score weekly the first 12 weeks after surgery. The HAGOS questionnaire was measured at 12 and 52 weeks postoperatively. Results: Baseline characteristics and operation details were comparable between treatment groups. Regarding the NRS pain no significant difference was found between groups at any point the first 12 weeks after surgery ( p = 0.67). Both groups significantly improved after surgery ( p < 0.001). After 3 months follow-up there were no differences between groups for the HAGOS questionnaire except for the domain sport ( p = 0.02) in favour of the control group. After 12 months follow-up there were no differences between both treatment groups on all HAGOS domains ( p  > 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this randomised controlled trial show highest possible evidence that there is no reason for routinely capsular closure after interportal capsulotomy at the end of hip arthroscopy. Trial Registration: This trial was registered at the CCMO Dutch Trial Register: NL55669.048.15.

scholarly journals COVID-19 infection among international travellers: a prospective analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e050667
Author(s):  
Meaghan Lunney ◽  
Paul E Ronksley ◽  
Robert G Weaver ◽  
Lianne Barnieh ◽  
Norman Blue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Prospective Analysis ◽  
Pilot Programme ◽  
Negative Test ◽  
Secondary Transmission ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Test Result

ObjectivesThis report estimates the risk of COVID-19 importation and secondary transmission associated with a modified quarantine programme in Canada.Design and participantsProspective analysis of international asymptomatic travellers entering Alberta, Canada.InterventionsAll participants were required to receive a PCR COVID-19 test on arrival. If negative, participants could leave quarantine but were required to have a second test 6 or 7 days after arrival. If the arrival test was positive, participants were required to remain in quarantine for 14 days.Main outcome measuresProportion and rate of participants testing positive for COVID-19; number of cases of secondary transmission.ResultsThe analysis included 9535 international travellers entering Alberta by air (N=8398) or land (N=1137) that voluntarily enrolled in the Alberta Border Testing Pilot Programme (a subset of all travellers); most (83.1%) were Canadian citizens. Among the 9310 participants who received at least one test, 200 (21.5 per 1000, 95% CI 18.6 to 24.6) tested positive. Sixty-nine per cent (138/200) of positive tests were detected on arrival (14.8 per 1000 travellers, 95% CI 12.5 to 17.5). 62 cases (6.7 per 1000 travellers, 95% CI 5.1 to 8.5; 31.0% of positive cases) were identified among participants that had been released from quarantine following a negative test result on arrival. Of 192 participants who developed symptoms, 51 (26.6%) tested positive after arrival. Among participants with positive tests, four (2.0%) were hospitalised for COVID-19; none required critical care or died. Contact tracing among participants who tested positive identified 200 contacts; of 88 contacts tested, 22 were cases of secondary transmission (14 from those testing positive on arrival and 8 from those testing positive thereafter). SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 lineage was not detected in any of the 200 positive cases.Conclusions21.5 per 1000 international travellers tested positive for COVID-19. Most (69%) tested positive on arrival and 31% tested positive during follow-up. These findings suggest the need for ongoing vigilance in travellers testing negative on arrival and highlight the value of follow-up testing and contact tracing to monitor and limit secondary transmission where possible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document