Arthroscopic Management of Hip Chondral Defects: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

PURPOSE: To critically evaluate the evidence for arthroscopic management of chondral defects in the hip through a systematic literature review. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to identify all articles addressing the arthroscopic management of chondral defects about the hip. Case reports, open techniques, and those associated with osteonecrosis were excluded. Articles were assessed for sample size, location, severity, and size of chondral defects, and the surgical technique. Associated injuries, follow-up duration (months), and functional outcomes were recorded. Study cohorts were defined by a surgical technique (debridement v microfracture v autologous chondrocyte transplantation [ACT]). Statistical analysis was performed with a χ(2) test and analysis of variance with post hoc pairwise analysis for categorical and continuous data, respectively, with significance defined as P < .05. RESULTS: The literature search identified 269 articles, of which 12 clinical studies met inclusion criteria for this analysis. After pooling the data, there were 579 (64.7%) debridements, 279 (31.2%) microfracture, and 37 (4.1%) ACT performed. Patients were followed for an average of 27.1 months (range: 5 to 72 months). All lesions treated with either a microfracture or ACT were high grade (Outerbridge 3 to 4). However, lesion size was significantly larger in ACT-treated patients compared with those who underwent microfracture (357.3 ± 96.0 mm(2)v 149.5 ± 20.7 mm(2); P = .020). All cohorts showed significant improvement in functional outcomes after hip arthroscopy (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review showed that arthroscopic debridement, microfracture, and ACT are associated with equivalent improvement in clinical outcomes in patients with high-grade chondral defects in the hip in the short- and midterm follow-up. In addition, although there were no differences in patient characteristics and demographics based on the surgical technique, we confirmed the hypothesis that lesion size varied significantly between arthroscopic techniques, and that the decision to use one technique over another may be determined by the size of the defect. Therefore, lesion size is likely to influence the development of hip- and technique-specific indications, and may also represent a useful metric for success of surgical intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.