Patient-Reported Outcomes of Capsular Repair Versus Capsulotomy in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy: Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up—A Matched Comparison Study
Authors: Domb BG, Chaharbakhshi EO, Perets I, Walsh JP, Yuen LC, Ashberg LJ
Journal: Arthroscopy. 2018 Mar;34(3):853–863.e1
DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2017.10.019 | PMID: 29373289
Background
The long-term benefits of capsular repair versus unrepaired capsulotomy during hip arthroscopy remain debated.
Methods
Matched cohort with minimum 5-year follow-up comparing PROs, revision rates, and conversion to arthroplasty between capsular repair and unrepaired groups.
Key Findings
- Both groups improved, but capsular repair patients showed more durable PRO improvements and higher satisfaction.
- Lower conversion to arthroplasty with repair (10.8% vs 18.5%).
- Unrepaired group showed decline in mHHS over time.
Conclusions
Capsular repair may enhance long-term function and reduce arthroplasty risk.
What Does This Mean for Providers?
- Capsular repair should be strongly considered to improve mid- to long-term outcomes.
- Individualize decisions for patients who may not tolerate repair or in whom anatomy precludes it.
- Educate patients on the potential benefits of repair in durability of hip function and lower arthroplasty conversion.
- Repair may be particularly important in younger, active patients.