Does capsular repair make a difference in the integrity and thickness of anterior capsule in the setting of borderline hip dysplasia

• Published in: BMC musculoskeletal disorders 2023-03, Vol.24 (1), p.187-187, Article 187
• Main Authors: Yang, Fan, Huang, Hong-Jie, Zhang, Xin, Wang, Jian-Quan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Anterior capsular defect; Anterior capsular thickness; Arthritis; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroscopy; Body mass index; Bone dysplasia; Borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip; Care and treatment; Cartilage; Defects; Demography; Diagnosis; Dysplasia; Femoracetabular Impingement - surgery; Hip; Hip - surgery; Hip Dislocation - diagnostic imaging; Hip Dislocation - surgery; Hip joint; Hip Joint - diagnostic imaging; Hip Joint - surgery; Humans; Ligaments; Localization; Magnetic resonance imaging; Musculoskeletal diseases; Osteoarthritis; Patients; Rehabilitation; Retrospective Studies; Statistical analysis; Surgery; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1471-2474; 1471-2474
• DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06307-y

Hip joint capsular ligaments serve a fundamental role in balancing functional mobility and joint stability. However, few studies had focused on postoperative capsule changes in patients with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip (BDDH). To evaluate the integrity and thickness of anterior hip capsular thickness on pre and postoperative MRI in BDDH patients. Case series study; Level of evidence III. A retrospective analysis was performed using data from BDDH patients who had arthroscopy between 2016 and 2019. Two groups were created and propensity-score matched based on whether the capsule was sutured. The study group comprised patients who have undergone routine capsule repair between 2018 and 2019. The control group includes BDDH patients with unrepaired capsulotomy between 2016 and 2018. Capsular integrity and thickness were measured on MRI before surgery and at least one year postoperatively. Furthermore, analysis was performed on correlations between the presence of a capsular defect and related factors. Propensity-score matching yielded 37 hips in the repair group and 37 hips in the non-repair group. There were no significant differences detected in age, sex, and BMI between the two groups. MRI detected capsular defects in 3 hips (8.1%) in the repair group and 10 hips (27.0%) in the non-repair group (p = 0.032). The defect was found to be along the interportal capsulotomy line in all capsular defect cases. Moreover, the postoperative anterior capsule thickness in the study group was significantly thinner compared with preoperative (2.9 ± 0.5 mm vs 3.7 ± 0.6 mm; p