| Literature DB >> 32493388 |
Ju'an Yue1, He Gao2, Xiaozhong Guo3, Randong Wang1, Bing Li1, Qiang Sun1, Wangyan Liu1, Jiao Chen1, Yingnan Li1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) causes severe hip dysfunction. Left untreated, 80% of patients experience femoral head collapse, and 65-70% of patients require total hip arthroplasty (THA). Therefore, effective treatment is very important for ONFH.Entities:
Keywords: Femoral head; Fibula allograft; Osteonecrosis; Systematic review
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32493388 PMCID: PMC7268760 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-020-01730-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Fig. 1Flowchart of the selection process
Characteristics of the included studies
| Study | Study design | Total hips/stage of hips | Sex (F/M) | Mean age (year) | Mean follow-up (month) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wei et al. 2011 [ | Prospective, noncontrolled study | 223 IIA, 10 IIB, 61 IIC, 63 IIIA, 89 | 61/101 | 33.5 (19–54) | 24 |
| Zeng et al. 2015 [ | Retrospective, noncontrolled study | 18 IIB, 5 IIC, 13 | 3/15 | 40.7 (22–49) | 53.3 |
| Wu et al. 2018 [ | Retrospective, noncontrolled study | 29 IIA, 9 IIB, 13 IIC, 4 IIIA, 3 | 7 (hips)/22 (hips) | 38.9 (24–58) | 168 |
| Cao et al. 2018 [ | Prospective randomized trial | II, 12 III, 17 | 10/17 | 37.6 (20–62) | 41.1 |
II, 13 III, 13 | 8/18 | 36.9 (18–60) | 43.9 | ||
| Feng et al. 2019 [ | Retrospective cohort study | IIA, 12 IIB, 28 IIC, 19 IIIA, 4 IIIB, 4 IIIC, 2 | 39/30 | 31.5 (21–45) | 84 |
IIA, 3 IIB, 5 IIC, 5 IIIA, 18 IIIB, 18 IIIC, 20 |
Classification systems used in the studies
| System | Definition | |
|---|---|---|
| ARCO | Stage 0—bone biopsy positive, all imaging normal Stage I—normal findings on radiographs and abnormal MRI findings IA, < 15%; IB, 15–30%; IC, > 30% Stage II—abnormal X-ray findings, no femoral head collapse on X-ray and CT, and lesions were subdivided into medial, central, and lateral depending on the location of femoral head involvement IA, < 15%; IB, 15–30%; IC, > 30% Stage III—crescent sign, the lesion can be subdivided into medial, central, and lateral according to the position of femoral head Involvement IIIA: crescent sign, < 15% or collapse, < 2 mm IIIB: crescent sign, 15–30% or collapse, 2–4 mm IIIC: crescent sign, > 30% or collapse, > 4 mm Stage IV—osteoarthritic acetabular changes and cartilage changes | Wei et al. [ |
| Steinberg | Stage 0—normal or nondiagnostic X-ray, bone scan, and MRI Stage I—normal X-ray, abnormal bone scan, and/or MRI Stage II—lucent and sclerotic changes in femoral head Stage III—subchondral collapse (crescent sign) without flattening Stage IV—flattening of femoral head Stage V—joint narrowing and/or acetabular changes Stage VI—advanced degenerative change | Cao et al. [ |
Methods and outcomes of HHS in the studies
| Study | Treatment | Assisted measures | Pre- vs. postop, Harris hip score | Results, excellent ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wei et al. | Fibula allograft | Autogenous bone graft | IIA, 72.5 vs. 96 | 6/4/100% |
| IIB, 0.2 vs. 90 | 52/5/93.40% | |||
| IIC, 64.3 vs. 80.3 | 20/17/58.70% | |||
| IIIA, 51.5 vs. 85.4 | 30/47/86.50% | |||
| Total, 61.2 vs. 87.5 | 108/73/81.10% | |||
| Zeng et al. | Fibula allograft | Allogeneic bone granule | IIB, 57.8 vs. 91.4 | – |
| IIC, 63.0 vs. 80.9 | – | |||
| Total, 61.6 vs. 83.8 | – | |||
| Wu et al. | Two fibula allograft | – | Total, 50.3 vs. 76.1 | – |
| Cao et al. | Fibula allograft | Multi-directional CD+ Autogenous bone graft | Total, 66.75 vs. 87.83 | 16/8/82.8% |
| Fibula allograft | Single CD+ Autogenous bone graft | Total, 64.82 vs. 80.97 | 8/8/61.6% | |
| Feng et al. | Fibula allograft | Allogeneic cancellous bone | Total, 70.7 vs. 92.4 | – |
| VGTF | Autogenous bone graft | Total, 58.1 vs. 84.2 | – |
CD core decompression, VGTF vascularized greater trochanter flap, Rate excellent and good rate
Radiographic outcomes
| Study | Radiographic progression (%) | Radiographic progression on stage (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | IV | ||
| Wei et al. | 42% | ||||
| Zeng et al. | 22% | IIB, 0% IIC, 30.77% | |||
| Wu et al. | 69% | ||||
| Cao et al. | 10.3% | ||||
| 26.9% | |||||
| Feng et al. | 7.25% | ||||
| 36.23% | |||||
Outcomes of the conversion rate to THA and complications
| Study | Rate of conversion to THA | Rate of conversion to THA based on stage (ARCO) | Complication ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wei et al. | 19% | – | 9, mild pyrexia 3, minor wound hematoma 3, deep infection |
| Zeng et al. | 22% | IIB, 0% IIC, 22% | 1, weakness of ankle and foot |
| Wu et al. | 34.5% | IIA, 3.44% IIB, 17.24% IIC, 3.44% IIIA, 10.34% | – |
| Cao et al. | 3.44% | – | – |
| 19.23% | – | 1, subtrochanteric fracture | |
| Feng et al. | 4.35% | IIIB, 10.71% | – |
| 14.49% | IIC, 20% IIIB, 16.67% IIIC, 30% | 1, superficial wound infection 2, greater trochanter pain |