The hip fluid seal—Part II: The effect of an acetabular labral tear, repair, resection, and reconstruction on hip stability to distraction

  • Jeffrey J. Nepple
  • Marc J. Philippon
  • Kevin J. Campbell
  • Grant J. Dornan
  • Kyle S. Jansson
  • Robert F. LaPrade
  • Coen A. WijdicksEmail author



The acetabular labrum is theorized to be important to normal hip function by providing stability to distraction forces through the suction effect of the hip fluid seal. The purpose of this study was to determine the relative contributions of the hip capsule and labrum to the distractive stability of the hip, and to characterize hip stability to distraction forces in six labral conditions: intact labrum, labral tear, labral repair (looped vs. through sutures), partial resection, labral reconstruction with iliotibial band, and complete resection.


Eight cadaveric hips with a mean age of 47.8 years (SD 4.3, range 41–51 years) were included. For each condition, the hip seal was broken by distracting the hip at a rate of 0.33 mm/s while the required force, energy, and negative intra-articular pressure were measured. For comparisons between labral conditions, measurements were normalized to the intact labral state (percent of intact).


The relative contribution of the labrum to distractive stability was greatest at 1 and 2 mm of displacement, where it was significantly greater than the role of the capsule and accounted for 77 % (SD 27 %, p = 0.006) and 70 % (SD 7 %, p = 0.009) of total distractive stability, respectively. The relative contribution of the capsule to distractive stability increased with progressive displacement, providing 41 % (SD 49 %) and 52 % (SD 53 %) of distractive stability at 3 and 5 mm of distraction, respectively. The maximal distraction force required to break the hip seal in the intact labral state (capsule removed) varied from 124 to 150 N. Labral tear, partial resection, and complete resection resulted in average maximal distraction forces of 76 % (SD 34 %), 29 % (SD 26 %), and 27 % (SD 22 %), respectively, compared to the intact state. Through type labral repairs resulted in significantly greater improvements (from the labral tear state) in maximal negative pressure generated, compared to looped type repairs (median increase; +32 vs. −9 %, p = 0.029). Labral reconstruction resulted in a mean maximal distraction force of 66 % (SD 35 %), with a significant improvement of 37 % compared to partial labral resection (p < 0.001).


The acetabular labrum was the primary hip stabilizer to distraction forces at small displacements (1–2 mm). Partial labral resection significantly decreased the distractive strength of the hip fluid seal. Labral reconstruction significantly improved distractive stability, compared to partial labral resection. The results of this study may provide insight into the relative importance of the capsule and labrum to distractive stability of the hip and may help to explain hip microinstability in the setting of labral disease.


Hip seal Labral repair Labral reconstruction Hip distraction 



We would like to thank Penny Bortz, RN and Jane Roehrig, RN for their assistance in labral reconstruction graft preparation and Kelly Adair for his assistance in specimen acquisition.

Conflict of interest

Smith and Nephew Endoscopy provided unrestricted in-kind donations of the surgical tools utilized in this study.


  1. 1.
    Boykin RE, Patterson DC, Briggs KK, Dee A, Philippon MJ (2013) Results of arthroscopic labral reconstruction of the hip in elite athletes. Am J Sports Med 41(10):2296–2301PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Byrd JW, Chern KY (1997) Traction versus distension for distraction of the joint during hip arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 13(3):346–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crawford MJ, Dy CJ, Alexander JW, Thompson M, Schroder SJ, Vega CE, Patel RV, Miller AR, McCarthy JC, Lowe WR, Noble PC (2007) The 2007 Frank Stinchfield Award: the biomechanics of the hip labrum and the stability of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 465:16–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dienst M, Seil R, Gödde S, Brang M, Becker K, Georg T, Kohn D (2002) Effects of traction, distension, and joint position on distraction of the hip joint: an experimental study in cadavers. Arthroscopy 18(8):865–871PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferguson SJ, Bryant JT, Ganz R, Ito K (2003) An in vitro investigation of the acetabular labral seal in hip joint mechanics. J Biomech 36(2):171–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Geyer MR, Philippon MJ, Fagrelius TS, Briggs KK (2013) Acetabular labral reconstruction with an iliotibial band autograft: outcome and survivorship analysis at minimum 3-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 41(8):1750–1756PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ito H, Song Y, Lindsey DP, Safran MR, Giori NJ (2009) The proximal hip joint capsule and the zona orbicularis contribute to hip joint stability in distraction. J Orthop Res 27(8):989–995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Komistek RD, Dennis DA, Ochoa JA, Haas BD, Hammill C (2002) In vivo comparison of hip separation after metal-on-metal or metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(10):1836–1841PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lombardi AV, Mallory TH, Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Fada RA, Northcut EJ (2000) An in vivo determination of total hip arthroplasty pistoning during activity. J Arthroplasty 15(6):702–709PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nepple JJ, Martel JM, Kim Y-J, Zaltz I, Clohisy JC, ANCHOR Study Group (2012) Do plain radiographs correlate with CT for imaging of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement? Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(12):3313–3320PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Philippon MJ, Briggs KK, Hay CJ, Kuppersmith DA, Dewing CB, Huang MJ (2010) Arthroscopic labral reconstruction in the hip using iliotibial band autograft: technique and early outcomes. Arthroscopy 26(6):750–756PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pollard TC, Villar RN, Norton MR, Fern ED, Williams MR, Simpson DJ, Murray DW, Carr AJ (2010) Femoroacetabular impingement and classification of the cam deformity: the reference interval in normal hips. Acta Orthop 81(1):134–141PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rydell N (1973) Biomechanics of the hip-joint. Clin Orthop Relat Res 92:6–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith MV, Panchal HB, Ruberte Thiele RA, Sekiya JK (2011) Effect of acetabular labrum tears on hip stability and labral strain in a joint compression model. Am J Sports Med 39:103S–110SPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weber W, Weber E (1837) Uber die mechanik der menschlichten gehwerkzeuge nebst der beschreibung eines versuches uber das herausfallen des schenkelkopfes aus der pfanne im luftverdennten raum. Ann Phys Chem 40:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wingstrand H, Wingstrand A, Krantz P (1990) Intracapsular and atmospheric pressure in the dynamics and stability of the hip: a biomechanical study. Acta Orthop Scand 61(3):231–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey J. Nepple
    • 1
  • Marc J. Philippon
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kevin J. Campbell
    • 1
  • Grant J. Dornan
    • 1
  • Kyle S. Jansson
    • 1
  • Robert F. LaPrade
    • 1
    • 2
  • Coen A. Wijdicks
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Steadman Philippon Research InstituteVailUSA
  2. 2.The Steadman ClinicVailUSA

Personalised recommendations