Literature DB >> 28463920

Presence of the Ossific Nucleus and Risk of Osteonecrosis in the Treatment of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort and Case-Control Studies.

Cynthia Chen1, Shevaun Doyle, Daniel Green, John Blanco, David Scher, Ernest Sink, Emily R Dodwell.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Concern for increased risk of osteonecrosis in hips with an absent ossific nucleus has led some surgeons to delay reduction in the treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) until the ossific nucleus is present. A previous meta-analysis reported a potential protective effect against high-grade osteonecrosis (II to IV) when the ossific nucleus was present. With a greater number of publications on this topic, revisiting this analysis is warranted. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically review and analyze the best clinical evidence regarding the association between the status of the ossific nucleus and development of osteonecrosis following the treatment of DDH.
METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for studies including the status of the ossific nucleus and rate of osteonecrosis after open and closed reductions for the treatment of DDH. Study characteristics and risk estimates were extracted. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using a random-effect model. Meta-regression assessed the relationships of reduction method, study quality, mean age at reduction, surgical approach, method of ossific nucleus assessment, and duration of follow-up to the odds of osteonecrosis.
RESULTS: In the 21 observational studies (18 retrospective, 3 prospective) that were included, osteonecrosis developed in 20.4% of the hips in which the ossific nucleus was present at reduction compared with 21.2% of the hips in which the ossific nucleus was absent. Presence of the ossific nucleus was not associated with decreased odds of any grade of osteonecrosis (odds ratio [OR] = 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.43 to 1.12) or of more severe osteonecrosis of Grades II to IV (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.30 to 1.17). Meta-regression did not show any effect of the mean age at reduction, reduction method, surgical approach, study quality, minimum or mean duration of follow-up, method of ossific nucleus imaging, or osteonecrosis classification system on the relationship between presence of the ossific nucleus and the risk of osteonecrosis.
CONCLUSIONS: The current literature does not support the hypothesis that presence of the ossific nucleus at reduction is associated with lower risk of osteonecrosis. Prospective studies with long-term follow-up and blinded assessors are warranted to optimally evaluate the relationship between potential risk factors and the development of osteonecrosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28463920     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.16.00798

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  10 in total

Review 1.  Imaging of developmental dysplasia of the hip: ultrasound, radiography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Christian A Barrera; Sara A Cohen; Wudbhav N Sankar; Victor M Ho-Fung; Raymond W Sze; Jie C Nguyen
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2019-11-04

Review 2.  Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: Controversies in Management.

Authors:  Steven Garcia; Leah Demetri; Ana Starcevich; Andrew Gatto; Ishaan Swarup
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2022-04-30

3.  Evaluation of the short-term curative effect of closed reduction in the treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip based on three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging finite element analysis.

Authors:  Jiani Liu; Tianyang Gao; Jia Li; Hui Shan; Shinong Pan
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-05-14       Impact factor: 2.562

Review 4.  Does the size of the femoral head correlate with the incidence of avascular necrosis of the proximal femoral epiphysis in children with developmental dysplasia of the hip treated by closed reduction?

Authors:  JianPing Wu; Zhe Yuan; JingChun Li; MingWei Zhu; Federico Canavese; FuXing Xun; YiQiang Li; HongWen Xu
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 1.548

5.  Avascular necrosis of the femoral head: Assessment following developmental dysplasia of the hip management.

Authors:  Ahmed F Al Faleh; Ayman H Jawadi; Samir Al Sayegh; Bander S Al Rashedan; Mohammed Al Shehri; Abdullah Al Shahrani
Journal:  Int J Health Sci (Qassim)       Date:  2020 Jan-Feb

6.  Efficacy of closed reduction for developmental dysplasia of the hip: midterm outcomes and risk factors associated with treatment failure and avascular necrosis.

Authors:  Ge Zhang; Ming Li; Xiangyang Qu; Yujiang Cao; Xing Liu; Cong Luo; Yuan Zhang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  Magnetic resonance imaging follow-up can screen for soft tissue changes and evaluate the short-term prognosis of patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip after closed reduction.

Authors:  Xianghong Meng; Jianping Yang; Zhi Wang
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 2.125

8.  Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability in the Salter Classification of Avascular Necrosis of the Femoral Head in Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip.

Authors:  Emily K Schaeffer; Ethan Ponton; Wudbhav N Sankar; Harry K W Kim; Simon P Kelley; Peter J Cundy; Charles T Price; Nicholas M P Clarke; John H Wedge; Kishore Mulpuri
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 2.324

9.  Narrative Review of Complications Following DDH Treatment.

Authors:  Raghav Badrinath; Caitlin Orner; James D Bomar; Vidyadhar V Upasani
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-10-23       Impact factor: 1.251

10.  Prereduction traction for the prevention of avascular necrosis before closed reduction for developmental dysplasia of the hip: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kun-Bo Park; Viranchi Narendra Vaidya; Hyejung Shin; Yoon Hae Kwak
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 2.423

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.