This review examines revision hip arthroscopy to improve outcomes and delay total hip arthroplasty in selected patients, suggesting important diagnostic considerations.
Hip arthroscopy has grown exponentially over the past decade, with a parallel rise in revisions, underscoring the importance of refined patient selection and diagnostic accuracy. This review outlines the most common causes of failure after primary hip arthroscopy and provides a framework for evaluation, imaging, and management. Notably, differentiating between impingement and instability is crucial, as misclassification can worsen outcomes. Revision procedures may provide clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes and delay total hip arthroplasty in well-selected patients. However, recognizing when to shift from preservation to replacement is key to optimizing outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Baker et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: