Background: Computer-assisted solutions are changing surgical practice continuously. One of the most disruptive technologies among the computer-integrated surgical techniques is Augmented Reality (AR). While Augmented Reality is increasingly used in several medical specialties, its potential benefit in orthopedic surgery is not yet clear. The purpose of this article is to provide a systematic review of the current state of knowledge and the applicability of AR in orthopedic surgery. Methods: A systematic review of the current literature was performed to find the state of knowledge and applicability of AR in Orthopedic surgery. A systematic search of the following three databases was performed: “PubMed”, “Cochrane Library” and “Web of Science”. The systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items on Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and it has been published and registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO). Results: 31 studies and reports are included and classified into the following categories: Instrument / Implant Placement, Osteotomies, Tumor Surgery, Trauma, and Surgical Training and Education. Quality assessment could be performed in 18 studies. Among the clinical studies, there were six case series with an average score of 90% and one case report, which scored 81% according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist (JBI CAC). The 11 cadaveric studies scored 81% according to the QUACS scale (Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies). Conclusion: This manuscript provides 1) a summary of the current state of knowledge and research of Augmented Reality in orthopedic surgery presented in the literature, and 2) a discussion by the authors presenting the key remarks required for seamless integration of Augmented Reality in the future surgical practice. Trial registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019128569.

Aims: Hip arthroscopy (HA) has become the treatment of choice for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). However, less favourable outcomes following arthroscopic surgery are expected in patients with severe chondral lesions. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of HA in patients with FAI and associated chondral lesions, classified according to the Outerbridge system.Methods: A systematic search was performed on four databases. Studies which involved HA as the primary management of FAI and reported on chondral lesions as classified according to the Outerbridge classification were included. The study was registered on PROSPERO. Demographic data, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, and rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) were collected.Results: A total of 24 studies were included with a total of 3,198 patients (3,233 hips). Patients had significantly less improvement in PROMs if they had Outerbridge grade III and IV lesions (p = 0.012). Compared with microfracture, autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) resulted in significantly reduced rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.042) and of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.038). Chondral repair procedures in these patients also did not significantly reduce the rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.931), or of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.218). However, compared with microfracture, AMIC significantly reduced the rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.001) and of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.011) in these patients. Those with Outerbridge grade III and IV lesions also had significantly increased rates of conversion to THA (p = 0.029) and of revision arthroscopy (p = 0.023) if they had associated lesions of the acetabulum and femoral head. Those who underwent labral debridement had a significantly increased rate of conversion to THA compared with those who underwent labral repair (p = 0.015).Conclusion: There is universal improvement in PROMs following HA in patients with FAI and associated chondral lesions. However, those with Outerbridge grade III and IV lesions had significantly less improvement in PROMs and a significantly increased rate of conversion to THA than those with Outerbridge grade I and II. This suggests that the outcome of HA in patients with FAI and severe articular cartilage damage may not be favourable.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(7):751–759.

Aims: This study reports mid-term outcomes after periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) exclusively in a borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) population to provide a contrast to published outcomes for arthroscopic surgery of the hip in BHD.Methods: We identified 42 hips in 40 patients treated between January 2009 and January 2016 with BHD defined as a lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) of ≥ 18° but < 25°. A minimum five-year follow-up was available. Patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) including Tegner score, subjective hip value (SHV), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were assessed. The following morphological parameters were evaluated: LCEA, acetabular index (AI), α angle, Tönnis staging, acetabular retroversion, femoral version, femoroepiphyseal acetabular roof index (FEAR), iliocapsularis to rectus femoris ratio (IC/RF), and labral and ligamentum teres (LT) pathology.Results: The mean follow-up was 96 months (67 to 139). The SHV, mHHS, WOMAC, and Tegner scores significantly improved (p < 0.001) at last follow-up. According to SHV and mHHS, there were three hips (7%) with poor results (SHV < 70), three (7%) with a fair score (70 to 79), eight (19%) with good results (80 to 89), and 28 (67%) who scored excellent (> 90) at the last follow-up. There were 11 subsequent operations: nine implant removals due to local irritation, one resection of postoperative heterotopic ossification, and one hip arthroscopy for intra-articular adhesions. No hips were converted to total hip arthroplasty at last follow-up. The presence of preoperative labral lesions or LT lesions did not influence any PROMs at last follow-up. From the three hips that had poor PROMs, two have developed severe osteoarthritis (> Tönnis II), presumably due to surgical overcorrection (postoperative AI < -10°).Conclusion: PAO is reliable in treating BHD with favourable mid-term outcomes. Concomitant LT and labral lesions did not negatively influence outcomes in our cohort. Technical accuracy with avoidance of overcorrection is essential in achieving successful outcomes.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(7):735–742.