Short-term clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy versus physical therapy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Maria T Schwabe, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
John C Clohisy, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
Abby L Cheng, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
Cecilia Pascual-Garrido, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
Marcie Harris-Hayes, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
Devyani M Hunt, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
Michael D Harris, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
Heidi Prather, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
Jeffrey J Nepple, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

Abstract

Background: Both physical therapy (PT) and surgery are effective in treating femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), but their relative efficacy has not been well established until recently. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the early clinical outcomes of these treatments have been published, with contradictory results.

Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of RCTs that compared early patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of hip arthroscopy versus PT in patients with symptomatic FAI. The hypothesis was that surgical treatment of FAI leads to better short-term outcomes than PT.

Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods: In March 2019, a systematic review was performed to identify RCTs comparing hip arthroscopy and PT in patients with symptomatic FAI. A total of 819 studies were found among 6 databases; of these, 3 RCTs met eligibility (Griffin et al, 2018; Mansell et al, 2018; and Palmer et al, 2019). All 3 RCTs reported international Hip Outcome Tool--33 (iHOT-33) scores, and 2 reported Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and HOS-Sport results. In a random-effects meta-analysis, between-group differences in postintervention scores were assessed according to intention-to-treat and as-treated approaches. Quality was assessed with CONSORT, CERT, TiDieR, and the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

Results: The 3 RCTs included 650 patients with FAI; the mean follow-up ranged from 8 to 24 months. All studies reported PRO improvement from baseline to follow-up for both PT and surgery. The quality of the Griffin and Palmer studies was good, with minimal bias. In the Mansell study, a 70% crossover rate from PT to surgery increased the risk of bias. The meta-analysis demonstrated improved iHOT-33 outcomes with surgery compared with PT for intention-to-treat (mean difference [MD], 11.3;

Conclusion: In patients with FAI, the combined results of 3 RCTs demonstrated superior short-term outcomes for surgery versus PT. However, PT did result in improved outcomes and did not appear to compromise the surgical outcomes of patients for whom therapy failed and who progressed to surgery.