TP3.4 Return to Play Following Capsular Management in Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

Clicks: 8
ID: 331160
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #376 of 444 articles by views in Journal of hip preservation surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 444 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Introduction As hip arthroscopy has evolved, capsular management has become standard; however, techniques vary, with some patients undergoing capsular repair and others receiving plication. Limited literature has evaluated how these techniques influence return-to-play outcomes, highlighting a gap in understanding their impact on the timing and rate of athletes’ return to play. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the rate and timing of return to play in athletes following hip arthroscopy with or without capsular management. Methods A systematic search of the PubMed and EMBASE databases was conducted by two independent reviewers in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported on RTP in athletes following hip arthroscopy with or without capsular repair or plication. Results Eleven studies met inclusion criteria, comprising 1725 hips in 1491 athletes. Most patients were male (65.2%) with an average age of 26.2 years and a mean follow-up of 25.6 months. Among athletes who underwent capsular plication, the RTP rate was 95.1%, with 89% returning to the same or higher level at a mean of 6.51 months. For those who received capsular repair, the RTP rate was 87.3%, with 79.4% returning to the same or higher level of play at a mean of 7.33 months. Athletes without capsular management had an RTP rate of 78.6%, with 67.1% returning to the same or higher level at a mean of 5.8 months. Additionally, patients with capsular plication demonstrated the highest postoperative patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores compared to capsular repair and no capsular management. Revision rates for capsular plication, repair, and no management were 2.1%, 6.1%, and 8.2%, respectively. Discussion/Conclusion While athletes undergoing hip arthroscopy generally demonstrate high RTP rates, current evidence suggests higher return rates and PROs with capsular plication and repair than with no repair, with plication potentially offering additional benefit.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220408699 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Kiera Lunn, Aziz Shittu, Cortez L. Brown, Henson Destine, Justin James Hicks
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of hip preservation surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jhps/hnag043.149
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnag043.149
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.