Zusammenfassung
IntroductionAvascular osteonecrosis of the femoral head (AVN) is a widespread disease affecting mostly young and active people, often exacerbating in progressive stages, ending in joint replacement. The most common joint preserving operative therapy for early stages is core decompression (CD), optional with cancellous bone grafting (CBG). For success it is vital that the necrotic area is hit and ...
Zusammenfassung
IntroductionAvascular osteonecrosis of the femoral head (AVN) is a widespread disease affecting mostly young and active people, often exacerbating in progressive stages, ending in joint replacement. The most common joint preserving operative therapy for early stages is core decompression (CD), optional with cancellous bone grafting (CBG). For success it is vital that the necrotic area is hit and the sclerotic rim is broken by drilling into the defect zone to relieve intraosseous pressure. The aim of this study was to investigate if both techniques are precise enough to hit the center of the necrosis and if there is a difference in precision between drilling with small pins (CD) and the trephine (CBG).Patients and methods10 patients underwent CD, 12 patients CBG with conventional C-arm imaging. Postoperatively 3D MRI reconstructions of the necrotic area and the drilling channels were compared. The deviation of the drilling channel from the center of the necrotic area was measured. PROMs (HHS, HOOS, EQ-5D, SF-36) were evaluated to compare the clinical success of these procedures.ResultsNeither with CD nor with CBG the defect zone was missed. The drilling precision of both procedures did not differ significantly: distance to center 3.58 mm for CD (range 0.0-14.06, SD 4.2) versus 3.91 mm for CBG (range 0.0-15.27, SD 4.7). PROMs showed no significant difference.ConclusionConcerning the most important difference between the two procedures-the surgical higher demanding technique of CBG-we suggest applying the less invasive technique of CD alone.
Altmetric