| Literature DB >> 31728183 |
Y Kuroda1, T Tanaka2, T Miyagawa3, T Kawai1, K Goto1, S Tanaka2, S Matsuda1, H Akiyama3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Using a simple classification method, we aimed to estimate the collapse rate due to osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) in order to develop treatment guidelines for joint-preserving surgeries.Entities:
Keywords: Collapse; Femoral head; Joint-preserving surgery; Kaplan–Meier survival analysis; Osteonecrosis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31728183 PMCID: PMC6825048 DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.810.BJR-2019-0022.R1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bone Joint Res ISSN: 2046-3758 Impact factor: 5.853
Fig. 1Schematic representation of T1-weighted MRIs of the 2001 revised Japanese Investigation Committee classification system[20] based on type. The classification schema comprises four types (A, B, C1, and C2). Type A involves the smallest osteonecrotic lesions of the four types (present only in the medial one-third, or less, of the weightbearing surface). Type B involves osteonecrotic lesions present in the medial two-thirds, or less, of the weightbearing surface. Type C1 lesions are characterized by an osteonecrotic zone that spans more than the medial two-thirds of the weightbearing surface at the acetabular edge. Type C2 involves the largest osteonecrotic zone that spans more than the medial two-thirds of the weightbearing surface and exceeds the acetabular edge.
Patient demographics
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Mean age at initial diagnosis, yrs ( | 45.5 (14.9; 15 to 86) |
| Total | 505 |
| Male:female | 233:272 |
| Total | 310 |
| Male:female | 141:169 |
| Total | 390 |
| Male:female | 184:206 |
| Total | 115 |
| Male:female | 49:66 |
| Hips: steroid use, n | 390 |
| Hips: alcohol intake, n | 83 |
| Hips: idiopathic, n | 32 |
Collapse rate at initial diagnosis as analyzed by demographic data
| Parameter/stage | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | Stage 3A | Stage 3B | Stage 4 | n | Collapsed hips at initial diagnosis, n (%) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| < 0.001[ | ||||||||
| A | 16 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 0/21 ( | |
| B | 18 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 34 | 4/34 ( | |
| C1 | 53 | 66 | 30 | 16 | 8 | 173 | 54/173 ( | |
| C2 | 34 | 63 | 96 | 46 | 38 | 277 | 180/277 ( | |
| Total, n (%) | 121 ( | 146 ( | 129 ( | 62 ( | 47 ( | 505 | 238/505 ( | |
| 0.340[ | ||||||||
| Male | 50 | 62 | 77 | 31 | 13 | 233 | 121/233 ( | |
| Female | 71 | 84 | 52 | 31 | 34 | 272 | 117/272 ( | |
| 0.006[ | ||||||||
| Bilateral | 107 | 114 | 91 | 43 | 35 | 390 | 169/390 ( | |
| Unilateral | 14 | 32 | 38 | 19 | 12 | 115 | 69/115 ( | |
| 0.002[ | ||||||||
| Yes | 106 | 117 | 86 | 42 | 39 | 390 | 167/390 ( | |
| No | 15 | 29 | 43 | 20 | 8 | 115 | 71/115 ( |
Statistically significant
Kruskal–Wallis test
Log-rank test
Fig.2Kaplan–Meier survival curves of precollapse cases. a) The cumulative five-year survival rates indicate that the collapse rate of precollapse osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) cases is 0% to 84.8%, in the order of smaller to larger lesion sizes. Type C2 progressed quickly, with 37% at one year and 58% at two years reaching the endpoint. b) Collapse rate of precollapse ONFH cases according to sex; there were no differences in terms of time to collapse (p = 0.453, log-rank test). c) Collapse rate of precollapse ONFH cases according to laterality; there were no differences in terms of time to collapse (p = 0.580, log-rank test). d) Collapse rate of precollapse ONFH cases according to steroid use; there were no differences in terms of time to collapse (p = 0.961, log-rank test).
Fig. 3Five-year collapse rates and hazard ratios (HRs) of each disease type as evaluated by the Cox regression model. A higher collapse rate and an increase in HR for collapse of the femoral head can be seen as the osteonecrotic lesion size increases.
Other reports on the collapse rate evaluated by the Japanese Investigation Committee classification system
| Authors (year) | Hips, n | Mean follow-up, yrs | Collapse/symptomatic rate, %[ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shimizu et al[ | 66 | 4.0 | |||
| Sakamoto et al[ | 31 | 3.0 | |||
| Nishii et al[ | 54 | 6.0 | |||
| Ito et al[ | 90 | 9.0 | |||
| Min et al[ | 81 | 8.3 | C1: | ||
| Takashima et al[ | 86 | 10.0 | C1: | ||
| Present study (2019) | 212 | 5.0 | C1: | ||
Prevalence rate of symptoms
Collapse rate evaluated by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis