While gluteus medius tears are more common in women 50 years of age and older than men of similar age, both genders can benefit from having it repaired, according to a new study.
No Outcome Differences in Gender for Gluteus Medius Tear Repairs

In “Differences in Clinical Presentations and Surgical Outcomes of Gluteus Medius Tears,” published online on October 26, 2020 in The American Journal of Sports Medicine, the researchers wanted to analyze differences between men and women in clinical presentations and patient-reported outcome scores after undergoing gluteus medius repair.
The gluteus medius, the muscle on the outside of the hip, is a key player in the hip’s lateral movement, helping patients stand up and walk without limping. Tears in this muscle are often called the rotator cuff tear of the hip.
The data includes a minimum of two years of follow-up. All the patients had postoperative scores for modified Harris Hip Score, Non-arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific subscale and International Hip Outcomes Tool-12. Thirteen men were propensity score matched to 39 women.
Overall men were at increased risk for associated lumbar pathology as compared with women (relative risk, 3.32; p = .02). Both men and women however showed significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes.
For the modified Harris Hip Score, the women’s score was 59.32 ± 15.36 to 83.81 ±16.82; p < .01, and the men’s score was 63.50 ± 16.41 to 84.77 ± 13.9; p < .01. The Visual Analog Scale score for women was 5.48 ± 2.00 to 1.93 ± 2.29; p < .01. For men, it was 4.93 ± 2.69 to 1.86 ±2.10; p < .01.
The researchers wrote, “These results suggest that women and men can both benefit after gluteus medius repair. Men were older and had increased risk for associated lumbar pathology than women at the time of surgery. Men and women both experienced significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes and compared favorably in terms of clinical effectiveness at a minimum 2-year follow-up.”

Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.