ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Comparative effectiveness of bone grafting vs. total hip arthroplasty in non-traumatic osteonecrosis of femoral head: a 5-year follow-up study with patient-reported outcomes.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Animal Models of Steroid-Induced Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head Established by Different Doses of Lipopolysaccharide Combined with Glucocorticoids: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare mid-term survival and health-related quality of life differences between bone grafting (BG) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in non-traumatic osteonecrosis of the femoral head (NTONFH) patients under 50 years of age.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study analyzed 165 consecutive NTONFH patients (2015–2020) undergoing BG (n = 55) or THA (n = 110). Primary outcomes were 5-year survival (revision endpoint), with secondary outcomes including Harris Hip Score, complications, and patient-reported measures (SF-36, JHEQ, UCLA). Survival analysis employed log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards model.
resultsThe THA group exhibited significantly higher 5-year survival rates than the BG group (95.5% vs. 81.8%, p = 0.003). The THA group demonstrated superior postoperative HHS total scores (91.3 ± 3.2 vs. 82.1 ± 6.7, p < 0.001), pain scores (42.8 ± 1.6 vs. 40.1 ± 3.2, p < 0.001), and physical activity levels (UCLA: 7.2 ± 1.5 vs. 6.5 ± 1.8, p = 0.018). However, the BG group outperformed in mental health domains: SF-36 mental component score (65.8 ± 13.2 vs. 58.4 ± 14.7, p = 0.021) and JHEQ mental score (24.3 ± 4.9 vs. 20.7 ± 5.6, p = 0.004). Subgroup analysis revealed comparable survival rates between BG and THA in ARCO IIIA-stage patients (87.2% vs. 94.6%, p = 0.672), while BG failure rates reached 44.4% in JIC C2-type patients.
conclusionTHA offers advantages in functional recovery and survival rates, but rigorously selected ARCO IIIA-stage patients undergoing BG achieve comparable survival outcomes to THA while exhibiting superior mental health benefits. BG is recommended for ARCO II-IIIA/JIC A-C1-type patients to preserve joint function and enhance psychosocial adaptation, whereas THA remains the optimal choice for advanced-stage (IIIB/IV) or JIC C2-type patients to ensure rapid functional restoration. This study provides evidence for personalized treatment strategies based on disease staging, anatomical severity, and patient psychological needs.
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.