ArticleCureus2025
Correlation of Necrotic Index and Modified Necrotic Index With the Harris Hip Score and Their Reliability in Patients With Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head.
Article in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the correlation between the necrotic index and the modified necrotic index with the Harris hip score (HHS), as well as to assess their interobserver and intraobserver reliability in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH).
methodsFifty-four adult patients (88 hips) presenting with atraumatic hip pain and radiographic evidence of ONFH (Ficat-Arlet grades 1 and 2) were included. Participants abstained from analgesics for one week prior to the study. All underwent MRI, and HHS was calculated by a resident uninvolved in the study. The necrotic index was determined using angles obtained from mid-coronal and mid-sagittal MRI slices, whereas the modified necrotic index was derived from angles measured in MRI slices where the necrotic lesion appeared at its largest size. Three senior consultants performed measurements on two separate occasions to assess reliability.
resultsBoth indices showed significant negative correlations with HHS. The modified necrotic index demonstrated a strong correlation (r = -0.940, p < 0.001), whereas the original necrotic index exhibited a moderate correlation (r = -0.790, p < 0.001). The interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for assessment of lesion size was significant for both indices (p < 0.05), but it was higher for the modified index (ICC = 0.81) compared to the original index (ICC = 0.69). Levene's test for homogeneity of variance indicated unequal variance across the two methods (p < 0.01). Measurement variance was smaller for the modified index than for the original index (p < 0.01), indicating greater precision. Both methods showed significant interobserver and intraobserver agreement (p < 0.05) Conclusion: Both the necrotic index and the modified necrotic index showed significant negative correlations with HHS. The modified necrotic index demonstrated a strong correlation, whereas the original necrotic index exhibited a moderate correlation. Both methods proved reliable for measuring lesion size, with the modified method showing greater precision. Additionally, both indices demonstrated significant interobserver and intraobserver reliability.
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.