A Retrospective Study on the Effect of Surgery on Hip Diseases

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
To study the effect of arthroscopy on the treatment of hip diseases and to evaluate the regularity and treatment of hip joint diseases.

Detailed Description
-----------------
To study the clinical effect of arthroscopic treatment in patients with hip disease, a retrospective study was conducted on 600 patients with hip disease from January 2011 to January 2016. All patients underwent preoperative examinations. These included preoperative supine anteroposterior hip radiographs, cross-lateral radiographs, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging.Preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including visual analogue scale (VAS), international hip prognostic instrument-12 (IHOT-12), and modified Harris hip score (MHHS), were evaluated at 1, 2, and 5 years after surgery.

Official Title
-----------------
A Retrospective Study on the Effect of Arthroscopy on Hip Diseases

Conditions
-----------------
Femoroacetabular Impingement, Acetabular Labral Tear

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: hip arthroscopy


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: The patient received imaging examination before surgery and was diagnosed with hip joint labrum injury, FAI and other hip joint diseases, and the patient complained of pain in the hip joint, buttocks or thigh. Conservative treatment is ineffective for more than 6 months. Exclusion Criteria: History of hip surgery, hip osteoarthritis, femoral head necrosis, hip infection, rheumatic disease, lumbar disease, ankylosing spondylitis, or sacroiliac joint disease.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 15 Years
Maximum Age: 70 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| patients accepted hip arthroscopy<br>patients with hip diseases and accepted hip arthroscopy in Peking University Third Hospital | Procedure: hip arthroscopy<br>* Use epidural anesthesia or general anesthesia. The patient lies on the orthopedic traction bed to protect the perineum and perform traction of the lower limbs on the surgical side. Under arthroscopy, check the labrum, acetabular articular surface and femoral head cartilage, and round ligament in turn. The acetabular labrum with tear degeneration was treated with labrum suture or labrum revision surgery according to the injury. Perform femoral head and neck plastic or acetabular plastic surgery, osteoid osteoma debridement, etc.<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The patient was followed up at 1 year after surgery to evaluate the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). | Visual Analog Scale (VAS), The highest score was 10, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the more obvious the pain. | 1 year after operation | 
| The patient was followed up at 2 years after surgery to evaluate the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). | Visual Analog Scale (VAS), The highest score was 10, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the more obvious the pain. | 2 years after operation | 
| The patient was followed up at 5 years after surgery to evaluate the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). | Visual Analog Scale (VAS), The highest score was 10, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the more obvious the pain. | 5 years after operation | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The patient was followed up at 1 year after surgery to evaluate the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12). | The International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12).The highest score was 120, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the better the postoperative recovery. | 1 year after operation | 
| The patient was followed up at 2 years after surgery to evaluate the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12). | The International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12).The highest score was 120, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the better the postoperative recovery. | 2 years after operation | 
| The patient was followed up at 5 years after surgery to evaluate the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12). | The International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12).The highest score was 120, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the better the postoperative recovery. | 5 years after operation | 
| The patient was followed up at 1 year after surgery to evaluate modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS). | Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS).The highest score was 44, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the better the postoperative recovery. | 1 year after operation | 
| The patient was followed up at 2 years after surgery to evaluate modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS). | Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS).The highest score was 44, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the better the postoperative recovery. | 2 years after operation | 
| The patient was followed up at 5 years after surgery to evaluate modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS). | Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS).The highest score was 44, and the lowest was 0. The higher the score, the better the postoperative recovery. | 5 years after operation |