ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
10-year follow-up results of the initial application of 3D-printed percutaneous guides in drilled decompression of femoral head necrosis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the feasibility and clinical significance of computer-aided design 3D-printed percutaneous guides in femoral head necrosis drilling and decompression surgery, and compare it with traditional surgery under fluoroscopy. The study also reports the results of follow-up after 10 years.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted on patients with femoral head necrosis who had undergone drilling decompression surgery from November 2011 to November 2015. There were 15 patients in the guide group and 15 patients in the control group, and all of them were followed up for 5 to 10 years after the surgery. All patients were staged according to ARCO staging based on imaging manifestations. The guide group used 3D-printed percutaneous guides designed with computer-aided design and printed using 3D printing technology, while the control group used traditional fluoroscopy for guidance. The study compared operative time, number of fluoroscopies, and guide needle adjustments.
resultsThe baseline data did not differ statistically significantly. The guide group had significantly shorter operative times, fewer fluoroscopies, and fewer guide needle adjustments compared to the control group. The average operative time in the guide group was 27.8 min, with 11.2 fluoroscopies and 1.2 guide needle adjustments, while the control group had an average operative time of 44.4 min, with 34.4 fluoroscopies and 3.4 needle adjustments. There was no significant difference in preoperative Harris scores between the two groups, but both groups showed significant improvement in postoperative Harris scores. After 10 years, the guide group had fewer cases of femoral head necrosis progressing to advanced ARCO stages III or IV, and fewer cases requiring total hip arthroplasty compared to the control group.
conclusionThe use of computer-aided design 3D-printed percutaneous guides in femoral head necrosis drilling and decompression surgery is feasible and clinically significant. It reduces operative time, fluoroscopy, and guide needle adjustments, and is more effective in preventing the progression of femoral head necrosis to advanced stages compared to traditional surgery under fluoroscopy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.