Literature DB >> 35230467

Comparative effectiveness of treatment modalities in severe Legg‑Calvé‑Perthes disease: Systematic review and network meta‑analysis of observational studies.

Nath Adulkasem1, Phichayut Phinyo2,3,4, Pasin Tangadulrat1, Jidapa Wongcharoenwatana1, Thanase Ariyawatkul1, Chatupon Chotigavanichaya1, Kamolporn Kaewpornsawan1, Perajit Eamsobhana5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: There are several treatment modalities for Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease (LCPD), self-limiting, avascular osteonecrosis of the femoral head in children. Most treatments focus on containment of the weakened femoral head, but there is no consensus on the best modality for severe LCPD. Therefore, we compared the effectiveness of all treatment modalities for severe LCPD.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus up until July 2021 for studies that investigated LCPD treatment effectiveness. A network meta-analysis was performed to examine the comparative effectiveness in terms of the ability to achieve radiographic spherical congruity of the hip joint after skeletal maturity. The risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of each treatment modality were estimated from both direct and indirect evidence. Treatment ranking was based on Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA).
RESULTS: A total of 857 studies were identified and 34 comparative studies with 3718 affected hips comparing seven different LCPD treatment modalities were included. Compared with symptomatic treatment, combined osteotomy was the most effective modality (RR = 1.47, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.42, SUCRA = 0.8), followed by femoral varus osteotomy (RR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.60, SUCRA = 0.7), and Salter innominate osteotomy (RR = 1.25, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.65, SUCRA = 0.6).
CONCLUSIONS: Combined osteotomy is the most effective procedure in terms of improving the spherical congruity of the hip joint in severe LCPD patients. However, the superiority of operative treatments seems to be limited to patients older than eight years old.
© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to SICOT aisbl.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease; Meta-analysis; Non-operative treatment; Operative treatment; Stulberg

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35230467     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-022-05352-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  36 in total

Review 1.  Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson; Jonathan J Deeks; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-06

2.  Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool.

Authors:  Georgia Salanti
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 5.273

3.  Combined osteotomy in patients with severe Legg-Calve-Perthes disease.

Authors:  Perajit Eamsobhana; Kamolporn Kaewpornsawan
Journal:  J Med Assoc Thai       Date:  2012-10

Review 4.  Evolution in diagnosis and treatment of Legg-Calve-Perthes disease.

Authors:  Seyed Mahdi Mazloumi; Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh; Amir Reza Kachooei
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2014-06-15

5.  Single Versus Combined Procedures for Severely Involved Legg-Calvé-Perthes Disease.

Authors:  Makoto Kamegaya; Mitsuaki Morita; Takashi Saisu; Jun Kakizaki; Yasuhiro Oikawa; Yuko Segawa
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.324

Review 6.  Do femoral or salter innominate osteotomies improve femoral head sphericity in Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Neil Saran; Renjit Varghese; Kishore Mulpuri
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited.

Authors:  Rebecca DerSimonian; Nan Laird
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 2.226

8.  The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.

Authors:  Brian Hutton; Georgia Salanti; Deborah M Caldwell; Anna Chaimani; Christopher H Schmid; Chris Cameron; John P A Ioannidis; Sharon Straus; Kristian Thorlund; Jeroen P Jansen; Cynthia Mulrow; Ferrán Catalá-López; Peter C Gøtzsche; Kay Dickersin; Isabelle Boutron; Douglas G Altman; David Moher
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-06-02       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.

Authors:  Jonathan Ac Sterne; Miguel A Hernán; Barnaby C Reeves; Jelena Savović; Nancy D Berkman; Meera Viswanathan; David Henry; Douglas G Altman; Mohammed T Ansari; Isabelle Boutron; James R Carpenter; An-Wen Chan; Rachel Churchill; Jonathan J Deeks; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Jamie Kirkham; Peter Jüni; Yoon K Loke; Theresa D Pigott; Craig R Ramsay; Deborah Regidor; Hannah R Rothstein; Lakhbir Sandhu; Pasqualina L Santaguida; Holger J Schünemann; Beverly Shea; Ian Shrier; Peter Tugwell; Lucy Turner; Jeffrey C Valentine; Hugh Waddington; Elizabeth Waters; George A Wells; Penny F Whiting; Julian Pt Higgins
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-10-12

10.  Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods.

Authors:  Gerta Rücker; Guido Schwarzer
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.