Arthroscopic assisted versus open core decompression for osteonecrosis of the femoral head: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

backgroundMinimally invasive treatment options for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) have been a prominent area of research in recent years. Arthroscopic-assisted treatments have been applied in the clinical management of ONFH; however, high-quality evidence verifying their effectiveness and safety is still lacking.

objectiveTo systematically assess the clinical efficacy and safety of arthroscopic-assisted core decompression (AACD) in treating ONFH.

methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, WanFang, and the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, from inception to June 25, 2024. We identified randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled studies on AACD for the treatment of ONFH based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.1 and Stata 17.0 software. The analyzed outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative femoral head collapse rate, Harris hip score, and postoperative complication rate. The Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system was used to assess the quality of evidence for the outcome indicators.

resultsA total of fourteen studies were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 1,063 patients-541 in the core decompression (CD) group and 522 in the AACD group. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between the two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, 12-month postoperative Harris hip score, or overall postoperative complication rate (P > 0.05). However, the AACD group had a longer operative time (MD = 31.19, 95% Cl: 5.32 to 57.07, P = 0.02) and a lower overall postoperative femoral head collapse rate (RR = 0.49, 95% Cl: 0.27 to 0.89, P = 0.02) compared with the CD group. Additionally, the AACD group showed significant improvements in Harris hip scores at 3 months (MD = 6.39, 95% Cl: 5.44 to 7.33, P < 0.00001), 6 months (MD = 7.56, 95% Cl: 6.63 to 8.49, P < 0.00001), ≥ 24 months (MD = 7.00, 95% Cl: 4.80 to 9.21, P < 0.00001), and at the last follow-up (MD = 6.89, 95% Cl: 5.30 to 8.48, P < 0.00001) compared to the CD group. The GRADE evidence assessment indicated that the overall postoperative complication rate was supported by moderate-quality evidence, while the evidence for operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative femoral head collapse rate, and Harris hip score was of low quality. The evidence for length of hospital stay was deemed very low quality.

conclusionThis meta-analysis suggests that AACD is an effective and safe treatment for patients with ONFH. However, due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, these results should be interpreted with caution. Further high-quality studies are recommended to confirm these findings.