Shapira J, Kyin C, Go C, et al. - This study was sought to distinguish present indications for secondary procedures in patients with failed hip arthroscopy and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of the secondary procedures, including revision arthroscopy, periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), and total hip arthroplasty (THA). Researchers enrolled individuals who had a secondary procedure after failed previous hip arthroscopy whereas the control groups were patients who had a primary procedure but did not necessary a secondary procedure. For each study, indications and procedures at the time of the secondary operation were documented. They assessed average PROs, and standardized mean difference was estimated to measure effect size. This research included 18 studies reporting on patients undergoing a secondary procedure after a previous hip arthroscopy. For revision hip arthroscopy, the most common indications were labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement. It was noted that patients undergoing a revision hip arthroscopy revealed good postoperative results but to an overall lesser extent than their primary counterparts. The results exhibited that the secondary PAO and THA groups also had favorable PROs, but the studies were inconclusive in ascertaining superior outcomes between the primary and secondary groups.