Location
Philadelphia, PA
Start Date
30-4-2025 1:00 PM
End Date
30-4-2025 4:00 PM
Description
Background: As endoscopic techniques for proximal hamstring repair become increasingly popular, it is essential to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this method compared to traditional open repairs. This systematic review aims to evaluate the current literature on outcomes of endoscopic proximal hamstring repair (ePHR), focusing on functional outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, and complication rates.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted identifying six studies reporting on a total of 115 patients undergoing ePHR with a minimum follow up of 12 months. Data extracted included patient demographics, injury characteristics, surgical techniques, rehabilitation protocols, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and complication rates. Patient-reported outcomes included measures such as the Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SS), and International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12). Both comparative studies between endoscopic and open repairs as well as those focusing solely on endoscopic repair were included.
Results: Across the studies, endoscopic repairs showed significant improvements in PROs. iHOT-12 scores improved by an average of 46.3 points, with postoperative scores ranging from 81.9 to 87.2. The mHHS scores ranged from 89.6 to 90.6, indicating strong functional recovery, while the HOS-SS scores averaged 85.95. Return to sport outcomes were significant, with one study reporting a 100% return to organized sports and 72.2% to recreational activities within its cohort, while another study showed 94.7% of patients successfully returning to sport. Additionally, both studies observed a 100% return to work. Across four studies comparing endoscopic and open repairs, the average complication rate was 15.54% for endoscopic repairs and 23.8% for open repairs.
Conclusion: Endoscopic proximal hamstring repair demonstrates favorable outcomes, including high patient satisfaction, significant functional improvements, and low complication rates. Based on the available literature, the evidence supports its use as an effective treatment option for proximal hamstring injuries, offering comparable or superior results to open techniques with fewer complications. Further studies with larger patient sample sizes are needed to strengthen this evidence.
Embargo Period
6-2-2025
Included in
Outcomes of endoscopic proximal hamstring repair: A systematic review
Philadelphia, PA
Background: As endoscopic techniques for proximal hamstring repair become increasingly popular, it is essential to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this method compared to traditional open repairs. This systematic review aims to evaluate the current literature on outcomes of endoscopic proximal hamstring repair (ePHR), focusing on functional outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, and complication rates.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted identifying six studies reporting on a total of 115 patients undergoing ePHR with a minimum follow up of 12 months. Data extracted included patient demographics, injury characteristics, surgical techniques, rehabilitation protocols, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and complication rates. Patient-reported outcomes included measures such as the Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscale (HOS-SS), and International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12). Both comparative studies between endoscopic and open repairs as well as those focusing solely on endoscopic repair were included.
Results: Across the studies, endoscopic repairs showed significant improvements in PROs. iHOT-12 scores improved by an average of 46.3 points, with postoperative scores ranging from 81.9 to 87.2. The mHHS scores ranged from 89.6 to 90.6, indicating strong functional recovery, while the HOS-SS scores averaged 85.95. Return to sport outcomes were significant, with one study reporting a 100% return to organized sports and 72.2% to recreational activities within its cohort, while another study showed 94.7% of patients successfully returning to sport. Additionally, both studies observed a 100% return to work. Across four studies comparing endoscopic and open repairs, the average complication rate was 15.54% for endoscopic repairs and 23.8% for open repairs.
Conclusion: Endoscopic proximal hamstring repair demonstrates favorable outcomes, including high patient satisfaction, significant functional improvements, and low complication rates. Based on the available literature, the evidence supports its use as an effective treatment option for proximal hamstring injuries, offering comparable or superior results to open techniques with fewer complications. Further studies with larger patient sample sizes are needed to strengthen this evidence.